COMBINING DEMOCRATIC EQUALITY AND LUCK EGALITARIANISM

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Lindblom, Lars
Data de Publicação: 2023
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: https://doi.org/10.21814/eps.1.1.49
Resumo: The concept of responsibility plays a crucial part in the debate between proponents of democratic equality, like Rawls, and defenders of luck egalitarianism, such as Dworkin. In this paper it is argued that the two theories can be combined, and that they should be combined to achieve a theory of justice that puts personal responsibility in its proper place. The concept of justice requires two different conceptions. The two theories can be combined because they deal with different problems of justice. They ought to be combined because, first, luck egalitarianism needs a theory of background justice, and second, a theory of justice must supply an answer to the question of just individual allocations, something that is not provided by democratic equality. Democratic equality and luck egalitarianism solve each other’s problems. The combined theory will lead to allocations of goods that respect both the difference principle and the envy test.
id RCAP_7744c1a2f044aeaa14ebd78d8934fd57
oai_identifier_str oai:journals.uminho.pt:article/4647
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling COMBINING DEMOCRATIC EQUALITY AND LUCK EGALITARIANISMASSOCIANDO A IGUALDADE DEMOCRÁTICA E O IGUALITARISMO DA SORTEOriginal ArticlesThe concept of responsibility plays a crucial part in the debate between proponents of democratic equality, like Rawls, and defenders of luck egalitarianism, such as Dworkin. In this paper it is argued that the two theories can be combined, and that they should be combined to achieve a theory of justice that puts personal responsibility in its proper place. The concept of justice requires two different conceptions. The two theories can be combined because they deal with different problems of justice. They ought to be combined because, first, luck egalitarianism needs a theory of background justice, and second, a theory of justice must supply an answer to the question of just individual allocations, something that is not provided by democratic equality. Democratic equality and luck egalitarianism solve each other’s problems. The combined theory will lead to allocations of goods that respect both the difference principle and the envy test.O conceito de responsabilidade desempenha um papel crucial no debate entre os defensores da igualdade democrática, como Rawls, e os defensores do igualitarismo da sorte, como Dworkin. Neste artigo, argumenta-se que as duas teorias podem ser associadas para alcançar uma teoria da justiça que coloca a responsabilidade pessoal no seu devido lugar. O conceito de justiça requer duas concepções diferentes. As duas teorias podem ser associadas por lidarem com diferentes problemas sobre a noção de justiça. Elas devem ser associadas porque, em primeiro lugar, o igualitarismo da sorte precisa de uma teoria de fundo da justiça, e em segundo lugar, a teoria da justiça deve fornecer uma resposta à questão da distribuicão individual justa, algo que não é esclarecido pela igualdade democrática. Cada uma das duas teorias, a igualdade democrática e o igualitarismo da sorte, resolve os problemas da outra. A teoria associada levará a uma distribuição de bens que respeita o princípio de diferença e o teste da inveja.Centre for Ethics, Politics, and Society - ELACH, University of Minho2023-09-26info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlehttps://doi.org/10.21814/eps.1.1.49eng2184-25822184-2574Lindblom, Larsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2024-01-29T10:56:29Zoai:journals.uminho.pt:article/4647Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-20T01:58:41.140894Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv COMBINING DEMOCRATIC EQUALITY AND LUCK EGALITARIANISM
ASSOCIANDO A IGUALDADE DEMOCRÁTICA E O IGUALITARISMO DA SORTE
title COMBINING DEMOCRATIC EQUALITY AND LUCK EGALITARIANISM
spellingShingle COMBINING DEMOCRATIC EQUALITY AND LUCK EGALITARIANISM
Lindblom, Lars
Original Articles
title_short COMBINING DEMOCRATIC EQUALITY AND LUCK EGALITARIANISM
title_full COMBINING DEMOCRATIC EQUALITY AND LUCK EGALITARIANISM
title_fullStr COMBINING DEMOCRATIC EQUALITY AND LUCK EGALITARIANISM
title_full_unstemmed COMBINING DEMOCRATIC EQUALITY AND LUCK EGALITARIANISM
title_sort COMBINING DEMOCRATIC EQUALITY AND LUCK EGALITARIANISM
author Lindblom, Lars
author_facet Lindblom, Lars
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Lindblom, Lars
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Original Articles
topic Original Articles
description The concept of responsibility plays a crucial part in the debate between proponents of democratic equality, like Rawls, and defenders of luck egalitarianism, such as Dworkin. In this paper it is argued that the two theories can be combined, and that they should be combined to achieve a theory of justice that puts personal responsibility in its proper place. The concept of justice requires two different conceptions. The two theories can be combined because they deal with different problems of justice. They ought to be combined because, first, luck egalitarianism needs a theory of background justice, and second, a theory of justice must supply an answer to the question of just individual allocations, something that is not provided by democratic equality. Democratic equality and luck egalitarianism solve each other’s problems. The combined theory will lead to allocations of goods that respect both the difference principle and the envy test.
publishDate 2023
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2023-09-26
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://doi.org/10.21814/eps.1.1.49
url https://doi.org/10.21814/eps.1.1.49
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 2184-2582
2184-2574
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Centre for Ethics, Politics, and Society - ELACH, University of Minho
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Centre for Ethics, Politics, and Society - ELACH, University of Minho
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799137071272558592