Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-kw2vx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T23:23:12.401Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cooperation and Equality: a Reply to Pojman

A Reply to Pojman

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 January 2009

Richard Norman
Richard Norman
Affiliation:
University of Kent at Canterbury
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Discussion
Information
Philosophy , Volume 72 , Issue 279 , January 1997 , pp. 137 - 142
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy 1997

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

2 I say ‘attributes to me’ because, though I do indeed use this sentence (Free and Equal 80), it is not my preferred formulation of egalitarianism. It comes in a context where I am discussing the principle ‘To each according to his need’, and I suggest that though the latter might be construed as a non-egalitarian principle, it is in fact egalitarian since the case for trying to meet the varying needs of everyone is based on the aim that ‘everyone should have an equally worthwhile life’. That formulation, then, is a provisional one intended to establish a bridge between the ‘needs’ principle and my own conception of equality.

3 John, Searle, ‘How to Derive “Ought” from “Is”’, Philosophical Review 73 (1964), 43–58.Google Scholar

4 David, Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature, Book III, Part II, Section II.Google Scholar