Against Equality and Priority
نویسنده
چکیده
I start from three premises, roughly as follows: (1) that if possible world x is better than world y for every individual who exists in either world, then x is better than y; (2) that if x has a higher average utility, a higher total utility, and no more inequality than y, then x is better than y; (3) that better than is transitive. From these premises, it follows that equality lacks intrinsic value, and that benefits given to the worse-off contribute no more to the world’s value than equal-sized benefits given to the better-off.
منابع مشابه
عدالت جنسیتی با بیعدالتی در نظام آموزشی استان ایلام
Introduction: Educational equality is newly considered in social, political and economic system of the nations. Many conventions, treaties & statements in the world emphasizing these rights have been determined and issued. This issue has been considered in politic, economic and social development plans of Iran. Explaining this issue in undeveloped areas such as Ilam province can provide i...
متن کاملImpartiality and Priority. Part 2: a Characterization with Solidarity
The ethic of ‘priority’ is a compromise between the extremely compensatory ethic of ‘welfare equality’ and the needs-blind ethic of ‘income equality’. We propose an axiom of priority, and characterize resourceallocation rules that are impartial, prioritarian, and solidaristic. They comprise a class of rules which equalize across individuals some index of resources and welfare. Consequently, we ...
متن کاملEthical Agreement and Disagreement about Obesity Prevention Policy in the United States
An active area of public health policy in the United States is policy meant to promote healthy eating, reduce overconsumption of food, and prevent overweight/obesity. Public discussion of such obesity prevention policies includes intense ethical disagreement. We suggest that some ethical disagreements about obesity prevention policies can be seen as rooted in a common concern with equality or w...
متن کاملEquality and Priority
This article argues that, contrary to the received view, prioritarianism and egalitarianism are not jointly incompatible theories in normative ethics. By introducing a distinction between weighing and aggregating, the authors show that the seemingly conflicting intuitions underlying prioritarianism and egalitarianism are consistent. The upshot is a combined position, equality-prioritarianism, w...
متن کاملPartial and complete equality of opportunity orderings
Equality of opportunity is concerned with the level-the-playing-field principle: society should compensate individuals who suffer from bad circumstances but let the agents exercise their responsibility. This paper proposes a partial ordering based on the inequality-of-opportunity curve, a mechanism that gives preference to those who are worse in terms of opportunity. Moreover, it is provided a ...
متن کامل