Are egalitarians really vulnerable to the Levelling-Down Objection and the Divided World Example?
This essay is a quick critique of one aspect of Derek Parfit’s criticism of Egalitarianism in his larger consideration of the claims of, and distinction between, Prioritarianism and Egalitarianism. It reviews issues relating to the ‘Levelling Down Objection’ and the ‘Divided World Example’. More sp...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | DE EN FR |
| Publicado: |
Editura ASE Bucuresti
2011
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/69f327f76821442f842176700ea8cab9 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | This essay is a quick critique of one aspect of Derek Parfit’s criticism of Egalitarianism in his larger consideration of the claims of, and distinction between, Prioritarianism and Egalitarianism. It reviews issues relating to the ‘Levelling Down Objection’ and the ‘Divided World Example’. More specifically, it is argued that the Levelling Down Objection is a serious problem only for Pure Telic Egalitarianism, not for Pluralist Telic Egalitarianism; and thateven in a Divided World, one can have an egalitarian justification forpreferring an equal distribution of a smaller sum of wellbeing to an unequal distribution of a larger sum. By these means, it is contended that Parfit’s claim of the vulnerability of Egalitarianism to the Levelling Down Objection and the Divided World Example is not sustainable |
|---|