The Fundamental Disagreement between Luck Egalitarians and Relational Egalitarians

2010 ◽  
Vol 36 ◽  
pp. 1-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Anderson
Keyword(s):  
John Rawls ◽  
Social Relation ◽  
Equal Distribution ◽  
Relational Goods ◽  
Samuel Scheffler ◽  
Luck Egalitarians ◽  
Richard Arneson

Much contemporary egalitarian theorizing is broadly divided between luck egalitarians, such as G. A. Cohen, Richard Arneson, and John Roemer, and relational egalitarians, such as John Rawls, Samuel Scheffler, Josh Cohen, and me. The two camps disagree about how to conceive of equality: as an equal distribution of non-relational goods among individuals, or as a kind of social relation between persons - an equality of authority, status, or standing (Anderson 1999).This disagreement generates a second, about when unequal distributions of non-relational goods are unjust. Luck egalitarians claim that inequality is unjust when it is accidental: when it is caused by morally arbitrary factors such as circumstances of birth. Relational egalitarians claim that inequality is unjust when it disadvantages people: when it reflects, embodies, or causes inequality of authority, status, or standing.

The Point of Justice

John Rawls ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 148-160
Author(s):  
Rainer Forst
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Social Life ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Moral Point ◽  
Moral Point Of View ◽  
Principles Of Justice ◽  
Luck Egalitarians ◽  
Social Circumstance ◽  
Better Than

John Rawls famously claimed that “the accidents of natural endowment and the contingencies of social circumstance” are “arbitrary from a moral point of view.” Luck egalitarians believe that a conception of justice that eliminates the effects of circumstance but not of choice captures that intuition better than Rawls’s own principles of justice. This chapter argues that the opposite is the case. We can learn from Rawls that one cannot overcome moral arbitrariness in social life by using a morally arbitrary distinction between choice and circumstance. Furthermore, the chapter argues that the incompatibility between these two approaches points to a deeper difference between a deontological and a teleological paradigm that is crucial for the debate between relational and nonrelational notions of political and social justice.

scholarly journals Luck Egalitarianism, Responsibility, and Political Liberalism

Dialogue ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
RYAN LONG
Keyword(s):  
Distributive Justice ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Free Choice ◽  
Political Liberalism ◽  
The Political ◽  
Luck Egalitarianism ◽  
Political Conception ◽  
Novel Reading ◽  
Luck Egalitarians

Luck egalitarians argue that distributive justice should be understood in terms of our capacity to be responsible for our choices. Both proponents and critics assume that the theory must rely on a comprehensive conception of responsibility. I respond to luck egalitarianism’s critics by developing a political conception of responsibility that remains agnostic on the metaphysics of free choice. I construct this political conception by developing a novel reading of John Rawls’ distinction between the political and the comprehensive. A surprising consequence is that many responsibility-based objections to luck egalitarianism turn out to be objections to Rawls’ political liberalism as well.

9. Global justice

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gillian Brock
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Global Level ◽  
Equal Distribution ◽  
Law Of Peoples ◽  
Thomas Pogge ◽  
Distribution Of Resources ◽  
Global Affairs

This chapter examines different models of global justice, which might consist of diverse components, such as the universal promotion of human rights, global equality of opportunity, a more equal distribution of resources globally, or promoting the autonomy of peoples who stand in relations of equality to one another. There is also debate about how best to realize the desired elements, what principles should govern our interactions at the global level, and how to improve the management of our global affairs. The chapter first considers John Rawls' Law of Peoples and its eight principles, along with some critical responses to this law. It then explores some grounds for scepticism about global justice, focusing on authority in the global domain and global governance. A case study on funding to address global poverty is presented, along with Key Thinkers boxes featuring Rawls and Thomas Pogge.

The State’s Role in Ensuring Fair Income Distribution in Vietnam Today: Some Issues from the Theory of Justice as Fairness by John Rawls

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-195
Keyword(s):  
Income Distribution ◽  
Economic Efficiency ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Social Stability ◽  
Social Equality ◽  
Justice As Fairness ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Analysis And Synthesis ◽  
Economic Philosophy ◽  
The Relationship

Fairness in income distribution is a factor that both motivates employees and contributes to maintaining social stability. In Vietnam, fair income distribution has been studied from various perspectives. In this article, through the analysis and synthesis of related documents and evidence, and from the perspective of economic philosophy, the author applies John Rawls’s Theory of Justice as Fairness to analyze some issues arising from the implementation of the state’s role in ensuring fair income distribution from 1986 to present. These are unifying the perception of fairness in income distribution; solving the relationship between economic efficiency and social equality; ensuring benefits for the least-privileged people in society; and controlling income. On that basis, the author makes some recommendations to enhance the state’s role in ensuring fair income distribution in Vietnam. Received 11thNovember 2019; Revised 10thApril 2020; Accepted 20th April 2020

Distribution of Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus in different eco zones of Thiruvananthapuram city with special reference to dengue viremia in humans

ENTOMON ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 223-230
Author(s):  
S. Sunil Kumar ◽  
D.A. Evans ◽  
K. Muthulakshmi ◽  
T. DilipKumar ◽  
R. Heera Pillai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aedes Aegypti ◽  
Aedes Albopictus ◽  
Dengue Shock Syndrome ◽  
Single Step ◽  
Equal Distribution ◽  
Distribution Study ◽  
Urban Zone ◽  
High Prevalence ◽  
Vector Management ◽  
Efficient Vector

Mosquito index study of three ecologically different ecozones of the Thiruvananthapuram district, Kerala showed sharp difference on the proportionate distribution of Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus. Human dengue viremia (HDV) was very high in those ecozones where A.aegypti density was high and HDV was low where A.albopictus was high. In a coastal zone of Thiruvananthapuram city, A. aegypti was the most abundant vector and in a hilly, arid suburban zone, A.albopictus was the abundant vector. In the urban zone both species of mosquitoes showed equal distribution. Study on the circulating serotypes in the serum of HDV by Single step single tube Multiplex PCR showed all the four serotypes viz DENV1, DENV2, DENV3 and DENV4 in patients of Thiruvananthapuram city, which indicated the possibility of Dengue Shock Syndrome, unless there is efficient vector management. Among the four dengue serotypes, Type 1 was the most abundant virus. Abundance of microhabitats in Thiruvananthapuram city, which support A. aegypti may be the reason for high prevalence of dengue fever in the urban zone.

Global Justice in Lutheran Political Theology

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-58
Author(s):  
Carl-Henric Grenholm
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Political Theology ◽  
Critical Examination ◽  
Equal Distribution ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Sharp Distinction ◽  
Main Thesis ◽  
Theories Of Justice ◽  
Influential Theory

The purpose of this article is to examine the contributions that might be given by Lutheran political theology to the discourse on global justice. The article offers a critical examination of three different theories of global justice within political philosophy. Contractarian theories are criticized, and a thesis is that it is plausible to argue that justice can be understood as liberation from oppression. From this perspective the article gives an analysis of an influential theory of justice within Lutheran ethics. According to this theory justice is not an equal distribution but an arrangement where the subordinate respect the authority of those in power. This theory is related to a sharp distinction between law and gospel. The main thesis of the article is that Lutheran political theology should take a different approach if it aims to give a constructive contribution to theories of justice. This means that Lutheran ethics should not be based on Creation and reason alone – it should also be based on Christology and Eschatology.

From Crusades to Colonization: Violence in Secular and Religious Political Theory

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Xavier Scott
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Modern Philosophy ◽  
Early Modern ◽  
International Law ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
State Power ◽  
Charles Taylor ◽  
Medieval Period ◽  
Beliefs And Values

This paper examines the transition in political philosophy between the medieval and early-modern periods by focusing on the emergence of sovereignty doctrine. Scholars such as Charles Taylor and John Rawls have focused on the ability of modern-states to overcome conflicts between different religious confessionals. In contrast, this paper seeks to examine some of the peace-promoting features of Latin-Christendom and some of the conflict-promoting features of modern-secular states. The Christian universalism of the medieval period is contrasted with the colonial ventures promoted by the Peace of Westphalia. This paper’s goal is not to argue that secularism is in fact more violent than religion. Rather, it seeks to demonstrate the major role that religion played in early modern philosophy and the development of sovereignty doctrine. It argues against the view that the modern, secular state is capable of neutrality vis-à-vis religion, and also combats the view that the secular nature of modern international law means that it is neutral to the different beliefs and values of the world’s peoples. These observations emphasize the ways in which state power and legitimacy are at the heart of the secular turn in political philosophy. 

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document