Debate: Capabilities versus opportunities for well-being

Journal of Political Philosophy 13 (3):359–371 (2005)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum have argued that justice is concerned, at least in part, with the distribution of capabilities (opportunities to function). Richard Arneson, G.A. Cohen, and John Roemer have argued that justice is concerned with something like the distribution of opportunities for well-being. I argue that, although some versions of the capability view are incompatible with some versions of the opportunity for well-being view, the most plausible version of the capability view is identical to a slight generalization of the opportunity for well-being view.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
126 (#140,507)

6 months
12 (#203,353)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Peter Vallentyne
University of Missouri, Columbia

Citations of this work

The capability approach in practice.Ingrid Robeyns - 2006 - Journal of Political Philosophy 14 (3):351–376.
Is the capability approach paternalist?Ian Carter - 2014 - Economics and Philosophy 30 (1):75-98.
The Political Egalitarian’s Dilemma.Fabienne Peter - 2007 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 10 (4):373-387.
Arranged Marriage: Could It Contribute To Justice?Asha Bhandary - 2018 - Journal of Political Philosophy 26 (2):193-215.

View all 9 citations / Add more citations