Social Philosophy and Policy 5 (1):1-31 (1987)

Authors
Alex Rosenberg
Duke University
Abstract
Is a government required or permitted to redistribute the gains and losses that differences in biological endowments generate? In particular, does the fact that individuals possess different biological endowments lead to unfair advantages within a market economy? These are questions on which some people are apt to have strong intuitions and ready arguments. Egalitarians may say yes and argue that as unearned, undeserved advantages and disadvantages, biological endowments are never fair, and that the market simply exacerbates these inequities. Libertarians may say no, holding that the possession of such endowments deprives no one of an entitlement and that any system but a market would deprive agents of the rights to their endowments. Biological endowments may well lead to advantages or disadvantages on their view, but not to unfair ones. I do not have strong intuitions about answers to these questions, in part because I believe that they are questions of great difficulty. To begin, alternative answers rest on substantial assumptions in moral philosophy that seem insufficiently grounded. Moreover, the questions involve several problematical assumptions about the nature of biological endowments. Finally, I find the questions to be academic, in the pejorative sense of this term. For aside from a number of highly debilitating endowments, the overall moral significance of differences between people seems so small, so I interdependent and so hard to measure, that these differences really will 1 not enter into practical redistributive calculations, even if it is theoretically i permissible that they do so. Before turning to a detailed discussion of biological endowments and their moral significance, I sketch my doubts about the fundamental moral theories that dictate either the impermissibility or the obligation to compensate for different biological endowments.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/S0265052500001229
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,089
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Justice, Self-Ownership, and Natural Assets.Michael Gorr - 1995 - Social Philosophy and Policy 12 (2):267-291.
Equality, Sufficiency, and Opportunity in the Just Society.Alexander Rosenberg - 1995 - Social Philosophy and Policy 12 (2):54-71.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Prenatal Equality of Opportunity.Eszter Kollar & Michele Loi - 2015 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 32 (1):35-49.
Disability, Respect and Justice.Linda Barclay - 2010 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 27 (2):154-171.
Land and Human Endowments.Damon Gross - 1997 - Reason Papers 22:39-57.
Reply to Critics.Aaron James - 2014 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 44 (2):286-304.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-02-17

Total views
25 ( #453,155 of 2,498,996 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #421,180 of 2,498,996 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes