Reconciling equality and choice

George Sher

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511841859.002

Chapter 1 - Reconciling equality and choice

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 August 2014

George Sher

Show author details

George Sher: Affiliation:
Rice University, Houston

Book contents

Get access

Summary

My aim in this book is to take a fresh look at two widely accepted ideas, and in so doing to shed new light on some old questions of distributive justice.

The ideas I have in mind – that all persons have equal claims to whatever benefits their society provides and that each person's choices should play a central role in shaping his own life – have both been accommodated, in one way or another, by every theory of justice of which I know. However, the theory that has addressed them most explicitly is the one that has become known as luck egalitarianism. In its simplest form, luck egalitarianism asserts that inequalities are just if and only if they are not due to luck. Put a bit more precisely and decomposed into conjuncts, it asserts, first, that all inequalities that cannot be traced to the parties’ own choices are unjust, and so should be evened out, but, second, that any inequalities that are due to differences in the parties’ choices are indeed just (or at least consistent with justice) as long as the options among which the parties chose were themselves sufficiently equal.

Type: Chapter
Information: Equality for Inegalitarians , pp. 1 - 19

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511841859.002 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cohen, Gerald, “On the Currency of Egalitarian Justice,” Ethics 99 (July 1989): 906–47CrossRef Google Scholar

Arneson, Richard, “Equality and Equal Opportunity for Welfare,” Philosophical Studies 56 (1989): 77–93CrossRef Google Scholar

Arneson, Richard, “Luck Egalitarianism: An Interpretation and Defense,” Philosophical Topics 32 (2004): 1–20CrossRef Google Scholar

Roemer, John, Equality of Opportunity (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998)Google Scholar

Rakowski, Eric, Equal Justice (Oxford University Press, 1991)Google Scholar

Hurley, Susan, Justice, Luck, and Knowledge (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2003)Google Scholar

Knight, Carl, Luck Egalitarianism (University of Edinburgh Press, 2009)Google Scholar

Anderson, Elizabeth, “What Is the Point of Equality?” Ethics 109 (1999): 287–337CrossRef Google Scholar

Scheffler, Samuiel, “What Is Egalitarianism?” Philosophy and Public Affairs 31 (2003): 5–39CrossRef Google Scholar

Dworkin, Ronald, “What Is Equality? Part 1: Equality of Welfare,” Philosophy and Public Affairs 10 1981): 185–246Google Scholar

Dworkin, Ronald, “What Is Equality? Part 2: Equality of Resources,” 10 (1981): 283–345

Dworkin, Ronald, Sovereign Virtue (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000)Google Scholar

Rawls, John, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971), p. 74Google Scholar

Lippert-Rasmussen, Kasper, “Egalitarianism, Option Luck, and Responsibility,” Ethics 111 (2001): 548–79CrossRef Google Scholar

Vallentyne, Peter, “Brute Luck Option Luck, and Equality of Initial Opportunities,” Ethics 112 (2002): 529–57CrossRef Google Scholar

Sandbu, Martin, “On Dworkin's Brute-Luck – Option-Luck Distinction and the Consistency of Brute-Luck Egalitarianism,” Politics, Philosophy and Economics 3 (2004): 283–312CrossRef Google Scholar

Roemer, John explores this question in a number of works including Equality of Opportunity and “Equality and Responsibility,” The Boston Review 20 (1995): 3–7Google Scholar

“On the Currency of Distributive Justice” through his last major work Rescuing Justice and Equality (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2008)

Temkin, Larry, “Egalitarianism Defended,” Ethics 113 (2003): 764–82CrossRef Google Scholar

Arneson, Richard, “Luck Egalitarianism and Prioritarianism,” Ethics 110 (2000): 339–49CrossRef Google Scholar

Nagel, Thomas, who endorses a version of luck egalitarianism in his book Equality and Partiality (Oxford University Press, 1991)Google Scholar

Sen, Amartya, “Equality of What?” in The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, ed. McMurrin, Sterling (Cambridge University Press, 1980)Google Scholar

Sen, Amartya, Inequality Reexamined (Oxford University Press, 1992)Google Scholar

Nussbaum, Martha, Creating Capabilities: The Human Development Approach (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2011)CrossRef Google Scholar

Fleurbeay, Marc, “Equal Opportunity or Equal Social Outcome?” Economics and Philosophy 11 (2005): 25–55CrossRef Google Scholar

Voight, Kristin, “The Harshness Objection: Is Luck Egalitarianism Too Harsh on the Victims of Option Luck?,” Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 10 (2007): 389–407CrossRef Google Scholar

Segall, Shlomi, “In Solidarity with the Imprudent: A Defense of Luck Egalitarianism,” Social Theory and Practice 33 (2007): 177–98CrossRef Google Scholar

Barry, Nicholas, “Defending Luck Egalitarianism,” Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 (2006): 89–107CrossRef Google Scholar

Olsaretti, Serena, Liberty, Desert, and the Market (Cambridge University Press, 2004), pp. 162–69CrossRef Google Scholar

Markovits, Daniel, “Luck Egalitarianism and Political Solidarity,” Theoretical Inquiries into Law 9 (2008): 271–308Google Scholar

Carens, Joseph, Equality, Moral Incentives, and the Market: An Essay in Utopian Politico-Economic Theory (University of Chicago Press, 1981)Google Scholar

Miller, David, Market, State, and Community: Theoretical Foundations of Market Socialism (Oxford University Press, 1989), pp. 153–56Google Scholar

Book contents

Chapter 1 - Reconciling equality and choice

Summary

Access options

References

Save book to Kindle

Save book to Dropbox

Save book to Google Drive