Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T16:26:23.289Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Equality of What? On Welfare, Goods and Capabilities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 August 2016

G. A. Cohen
G. A. Cohen*
Affiliation:
All Souls College, Oxford
Get access

Summary

In his Tanner Lecture of 1979 called Equality of What? Amartya Sen asked what metric egalitarians should use to establish the extent to which their ideal is realised in a given society. In this study I comment on answers to Sen’s question in recent philosophical literature. I describe and criticize what a number of authors (and notably Rawls and Sen) of egalitarian persuasion have said about the dimension(s) or respect(s) in which people should be made more equal, when the price in other values of moving towards greater equality is not intolerable.

Résumé

Résumé

Amartya Sen, à l’occasion de sa Tanner Lecture” de 1979, intitulée “Equality of What?”, s’est interrogé sur la mesure que les égalitariens devraient utiliser afin d’établir jusqu’à quel point leur idéal a été réalisé dans une société donnée. Dans cette étude, nous réagissons aux réponses que la littérature philosophique récente a données à cette question de Sen. Nous décrivons et critiquons ce qu’un certain nombre d’auteurs (parmi lesquels Rawls et Sen) du courant égalitarien ont affirmé sur l’étendue à accorder au principe d’égalité entre individus lorsque le prix ou la valeur du mouvement vers une plus grande égalité n’est pas insupportable.

Keywords

024025024025
Type
Research Article
Information
Recherches Économiques de Louvain/ Louvain Economic Review , Volume 56 , Issue 3-4: A Special Issue in Honor of Professor A. Sen : Alternatives to Welfarism , 1990 , pp. 357 - 382
Copyright
Copyright © Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de recherches économiques et sociales 1990 

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.)

Footnotes

*

For their excellent criticism of a previous draft of the material in this article, I thank Richard Arneson, John Baker, Gerald Barnes, Will Kymlicka, David Lloyd-Thomas, John McMurtry, Thomas Scanlon, Amartya Sen and Philippe Van Parijs.

References

Arneson, R. (1989), Equality and Equal Opportunity for Welfare, Philosophical Studies, vol. 56, n° 1, pp. 77–93.Google Scholar
Cohen, G. A. (1989), On the Currency of Egalitarian Justice, Ethics, 99, pp. 906–944, July.Google Scholar
Dworkin, R. (1981a), Equality of Welfare, Philosophy and Public Affairs, vol. 10, n° 3, Summer, pp. 185–246.Google Scholar
Dworkin, R. (1981b), Equality of Resources, Philosophy and Public Affairs, vol. 10, n’ 4, Pall, pp. 183–345.Google Scholar
Landesman, B. (1983), Egalitarianism, Canadian Journal of Philosophy, vol. 13, n° 1, March, pp. 27–56.Google Scholar
Nozick, R. (1974), Anarchy, State and Utopia, New York, Basic Books.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (1971), A Theory of Justice, Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (1975), Fairness to Goodness, Philosophical Review, April, vol. 84, pp. 536–554.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (1982), Social Unity and Primary Goods, in: Sen, A.K. and Williams, B. (eds.), Utilitarianism and Beyond, Cambridge University Press, pp. 159–86.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (1985), Justice as Fairness, Political not Metaphysical, Philosophy and Public Affairs, vol. 14, n° 3, Summer, pp. 223–254.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (1986), Citizens Needs and Primary Goods, unpublishedGoogle Scholar
Scanlon, T. M. (1975), Preference and Urgency, Journal of Philosophy, vol. 72, n° 16, November, pp. 655–670.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1980), Equality of What?, in: McMurrin, S. (ed.), Tanner Lectures on Human Values, vol. 1, England, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1981), Ethical Issues in Income Distribution: National and International, in: Grassman, S. and Lundberg, E. (eds.), The World Economic Order: Past and Prospects, London, Macmillan, pp. 464–94, reprinted in: Sen (1984a), pp. 277–306.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1982), Choice, Welfare and Measurement, Oxford, Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1983a), Economics and the Family, Asian Development Review, 1, pp. 14–26, reprinted in : Sen, A. (1984c), pp. 369–385.Google Scholar
Sen, A.K. (1983b), Development: Which Way Now?, Economic Journal, 83. pp. 745–62, reprinted in: Sen, A. (1984c), pp. 485–508.Google Scholar
Sen, A.K. (1984a), Rights and Capabilities, reprinted in: Sen, A. (1984c), chapter 12, pp. 307–24.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1984b), Goods and People, reprinted as chapter 20 in: Sen, (1984c), pp. 509–32.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1984c), Resources, Values and Development, Oxford, Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1984d), The Living Standard, Oxford Economic Papers, 6.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1985a), Commodities and Capabilities, Amsterdam, North-Holland.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1985b), Well-Being, Agency and Freedom: The Dewey Lectures 1984, Journal of Philosophy, vol. 82, n° 4, pp. 169–221.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. et alia (1987a), The Standard of Living, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1987b), Well-Being and Agency, unpublished.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. (1988), Capability and Well-Being, unpublished.Google Scholar