Disparate Goods and Rawls' Difference Principle: A Social Choice Theoretic Treatment

Abstract

Rawls' Difference Principle asserts that a basic economic structure is just if it makes the worst off people as well off as is feasible. How well off someone is is to be measured by an ‘index’ of ‘primary social goods’. It is this index that gives content to the principle, and Rawls gives no adequate directions for constructing it. In this essay a version of the difference principle is proposed that fits much of what Rawls says, but that makes use of no index. Instead of invoking an index of primary social goods, the principle formulated here invokes a partial ordering of prospects for opportunities.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 84,213

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Rawls and Natural Aristocracy.Matthew Clayton - 2001 - Croatian Journal of Philosophy 1 (3):239-259.
Rawls' Paradox.Jason Brennan - 2007 - Constitutional Political Economy 18:287-299.
What is to Be Distributed?Rodney G. Peffer - 1998 - The Paideia Project.
Fair Equality of Opportunity.Larry A. Alexander - 1985 - Philosophy Research Archives 11:197-208.
The difference principle and time.Daniel Attas - 2008 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 7 (2):209-232.
A Modified Rawlsian Theory of Social Justice: “Justice as fair Rights”.Rodney G. Peffer - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 50:593-608.
Against Rawlsian equality of opportunity.Richard J. Arneson - 1999 - Philosophical Studies 93 (1):77-112.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-07-21

Downloads
104 (#137,042)

6 months
2 (#331,692)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Allan Gibbard
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

References found in this work

The Basic Structure As Subject.John Rawls - 1977 - American Philosophical Quarterly 14 (2):159-165.

Add more references