Choices Chance and Change: Luck Egalitarianism Over Time

被引:0
作者
Patrick Tomlin
机构
[1] University of Reading,Department of Politics & International Relations
来源
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice | 2013年 / 16卷
关键词
Luck egalitarianism; Personal identity; Equality; Responsibility; Distributive justice;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The family of theories dubbed ‘luck egalitarianism’ represent an attempt to infuse egalitarian thinking with a concern for personal responsibility, arguing that inequalities are just when they result from, or the extent to which they result from, choice, but are unjust when they result from, or the extent to which they result from, luck. In this essay I argue that luck egalitarians should sometimes seek to limit inequalities, even when they have a fully choice-based pedigree (i.e., result only from the choices of agents). I grant that the broad approach is correct but argue that the temporal standpoint from which we judge whether the person can be held responsible, or the extent to which they can be held responsible, should be radically altered. Instead of asking, as Standard (or Static) Luck Egalitarianism seems to, whether or not, or to what extent, a person was responsible for the choice at thetime ofchoosing, and asking the question of responsibility only once, we should ask whether, or to what extent, they are responsible for the choice at thepoint atwhich weare seekingto discoverwhether, or towhat extent, the inequalityis just, and so the question of responsibility is not settled but constantly under review. Such an approach will differ from Standard Luck Egalitarianism only if responsibility for a choice is not set in stone—if responsibility can weaken then we should not see the boundary between luck and responsibility within a particular action as static. Drawing on Derek Parfit’s illuminating discussions of personal identity, and contemporary literature on moral responsibility, I suggest there are good reasons to think that responsibility can weaken—that we are not necessarily fully responsible for a choice for ever, even if we were fully responsible at the time of choosing. I call the variant of luck egalitarianism that recognises this shift in temporal standpoint and that responsibility can weaken Dynamic Luck Egalitarianism (DLE). In conclusion I offer a preliminary discussion of what kind of policies DLE would support.
引用
收藏
页码:393 / 407
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
[41]   The relational approach to egalitarian justice: a critique of luck egalitarianism [J].
Kibe, Takashi .
CRITICAL REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL SOCIAL AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY, 2011, 14 (01) :1-21
[43]   On Who matters: extending the scope of luck egalitarianism to groups [J].
Amighetti, Sara ;
Harb, Siba .
CRITICAL REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL SOCIAL AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY, 2019, 22 (03) :301-317
[44]   Social justice as equality of opportunity in the form of luck egalitarianism [J].
Stoinski, Andrzej .
PRZEGLAD SEJMOWY, 2022, (04) :141-161
[45]   Luck Egalitarianism, Social Determinants and Public Health Initiatives [J].
Albertsen, Andreas .
PUBLIC HEALTH ETHICS, 2015, 8 (01) :42-49
[47]   Why not be a desertist?Three arguments for desert and against luck egalitarianism [J].
Huub Brouwer ;
Thomas Mulligan .
Philosophical Studies, 2019, 176 :2271-2288
[48]   Global Distributive Justice: from Luck Egalitarianism to Political Constructivism [J].
Arcos Ramirez, Federico .
DOXA-CUADERNOS DE FILOSOFIA Y DERECHO, 2012, 35 :361-392
[49]   On the significance of the basic structure: a priori baseline views and luck egalitarianism [J].
Jubb, Robert .
CRITICAL REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL SOCIAL AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY, 2011, 14 (01) :59-79
[50]   Undetermined Choices, Luck and the Enhancement Problem [J].
Elzein, Nadine .
ERKENNTNIS, 2023, 88 (07) :2827-2846