Abstract
AbstractMany goods are distributed by processes that involve randomness. In lotteries, randomness is used to promote fairness. When taking social risks, randomness is a feature of the process. The losers of such decisions ought to be given a reason why they should accept the outcome. Surprisingly, good reasons demand more than merely equalex antechances. What is also required is a true statement of the form: ‘the result could easily have gone the other way and you could have been the winner’. This rules in standard lotteries but rules out many lotteries based on merely epistemic probability.
Highlights
Many goods are distributed by processes that are partly or fully random: lots are drawn, risks are distributed, gambles are taken
This paper suggests that the normative literature on lotteries is incomplete and that normative theories of lottery justification need to be revised
Lotteries can have the same epistemic and even objective probabilities but – surprisingly – differ in the strength of the reasons they offer to the losers of the lottery
Summary
Many goods are distributed by processes that are partly or fully random: lots are drawn, risks are distributed, gambles are taken. Sometimes randomness is not deliberately chosen for fairness reasons but an unavoidable feature of distributive processes This is so when the creation of overall expected benefits comes with expected risks. Whether imposed lotteries or social risk, we end up with winners and losers determined by a (supposedly) random process. In the case of social risk, we should ask why the loser should accept a gamble that looked good ex ante but is a bad predicament ex post. If this is correct, having a theory that explains which reasons are good reasons to give to losers would be useful.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
