Egalitarianism Reconsidered
This paper argues that egalitarian theories should be judged by the degree to which they meet four different challenges. Fundamentalist egalitarianism, which contends that certain inequalities are intrinsically bad or unjust regardless of their consequences, fails to meet these challenges. Building...
| Главные авторы: | ; |
|---|---|
| Формат: | Электронный ресурс Статья |
| Язык: | Английский |
| Проверить наличие: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Загрузка...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Опубликовано: |
Brill
2011
|
| В: |
Journal of moral philosophy
Год: 2011, Том: 8, Выпуск: 4, Страницы: 567-586 |
| Другие ключевые слова: | B
Justice
B Equality B Egalitarianism B Справедливость |
| Online-ссылка: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Итог: | This paper argues that egalitarian theories should be judged by the degree to which they meet four different challenges. Fundamentalist egalitarianism, which contends that certain inequalities are intrinsically bad or unjust regardless of their consequences, fails to meet these challenges. Building on discussions by T.M. Scanlon and David Miller, we argue that egalitarianism is better understood in terms of commitments to six egalitarian objectives. A consequence of our view, in contrast to Martin O’Neill’s “non-intrinsic egalitarianism,” is that egalitarianism is better understood as a family of views than as a single ethical position. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1745-5243 |
| Второстепенные работы: | Enthalten in: Journal of moral philosophy
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/174552411X601067 |