Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Discrimination Based on Personal Responsibility: Luck Egalitarianism and Healthcare Priority Setting.Andreas Albertsen - 2024 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 33 (1):23-34.
    Luck egalitarianism is a responsibility-sensitive theory of distributive justice. Its application to health and healthcare is controversial. This article addresses a novel critique of luck egalitarianism, namely, that it wrongfully discriminates against those responsible for their health disadvantage when allocating scarce healthcare resources. The philosophical literature about discrimination offers two primary reasons for what makes discrimination wrong (when it is): harm and disrespect. These two approaches are employed to analyze whether luck egalitarian healthcare prioritization should be considered wrongful discrimination. Regarding (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Stealing Bread and Sleeping Beneath Bridges - Indirect Discrimination as Disadvantageous Equal Treatment.Frej Klem Thomsen - 2015 - Moral Philosophy and Politics 2 (2):299-327.
    The article analyses the concept of indirect discrimination, arguing first that existing conceptualisations are unsatisfactory and second that it is best understood as equal treatment that is disadvantageous to the discriminatees because of their group-membership. I explore four ways of further refining the definition, arguing that only an added condition of moral wrongness is at once plausible and helpful, but that it entails a number of new problems that may outweigh its benefits. Finally, I suggest that the moral wrongness of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Concept, principle, and norm—equality before the law reconsidered.Frej Klem Thomsen - 2018 - Legal Theory 24 (2):103-134.
    Despite the attention equality before the law has received, both laudatory and critical, peculiarly little has been done to precisely define it. The first ambition of this paper is to remedy this, by exploring the various ways in which a principle of equality before the law can be understood and suggest a concise definition. With a clearer understanding of the principle in hand we are better equipped to assess traditional critique of the principle. Doing so is the second ambition of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • But Some Groups Are More Equal Than Others: A Critical Review of the Group-Criterion in the Concept of Discrimination.Frej Klem Thomsen - 2013 - Social Theory and Practice 39 (1):120-146.
    In this article I critically examine a standard feature in conceptions of discrimination: the group-criterion, specifically the idea that there is a limited and definablegroup of traits that can form the basis of discrimination. I review two types of argument for the criterion. One focuses on inherently relevant groups and relies ultimately on luck-egalitarian principles; the other focuses on contextually relevant groups and relies ultimately on the badness of outcomes. I conclude that as neither type of argument is convincing, the (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Diskriminierung und Verwerflichkeit. Huxleys Albtraum und die Rolle des Staates [Discrimination and wrongfulness: Huxley’s nightmare and the role of the state].Michael Oliva Córdoba - 2020 - Zeitschrift für Praktische Philosophie 7 (1):191-230.
    What is discrimination and what makes wrongful discrimination wrong? Even after an ever-rising tide of research over the course of the past twenty-five or so years these questions still remain hard to answer. Exercising candid and self-critical hindsight, Larry Alexander, who contributed his fair share to this tide, thus remarked: “All cases of discrimination, if wrongful, are wrongful either because of their quite contingent consequences or perhaps because they are breaches of promises or fiduciary duties.” If this is true it (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Discrimination in the age of artificial intelligence.Bert Heinrichs - 2022 - AI and Society 37 (1):143-154.
    In this paper, I examine whether the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and automated decision-making (ADM) aggravates issues of discrimination as has been argued by several authors. For this purpose, I first take up the lively philosophical debate on discrimination and present my own definition of the concept. Equipped with this account, I subsequently review some of the recent literature on the use AI/ADM and discrimination. I explain how my account of discrimination helps to understand that the general claim in (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Medizinische Priorisierung in Pandemien und der ethische Diskriminierungsbegriff.Annette Dufner - 2023 - Ethik in der Medizin 35 (3):389-407.
    Zusammenfassung Im Falle von Pandemien können die Kapazitäten auf den Intensivstationen bekanntlich knapp werden. In Deutschland hat dieser Umstand zu einem Urteil des Bundesverfassungsgerichts geführt, in dem vom Gesetzgeber verlangt wurde, Menschen mit Behinderungen für solche Fälle besser vor Diskriminierung zu schützen. Aus ethischer Sicht hängt die Frage nach den Diskriminierungspotentialen von Priorisierungskriterien stark davon ab, worin genau das Übel einer Diskriminierung verortet werden muss – eine Frage, zu der es in der Ethik mehrere konkurrierende Theoriegruppen gibt. In diesem Aufsatz (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Learning to Discriminate: The Perfect Proxy Problem in Artificially Intelligent Criminal Sentencing.Benjamin Davies & Thomas Douglas - 2022 - In Jesper Ryberg & Julian V. Roberts (eds.), Sentencing and Artificial Intelligence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    It is often thought that traditional recidivism prediction tools used in criminal sentencing, though biased in many ways, can straightforwardly avoid one particularly pernicious type of bias: direct racial discrimination. They can avoid this by excluding race from the list of variables employed to predict recidivism. A similar approach could be taken to the design of newer, machine learning-based (ML) tools for predicting recidivism: information about race could be withheld from the ML tool during its training phase, ensuring that the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation