Abstract
The article defends the concept of luck egalitarianism. Luck egalitarianism states that social and economic inequality is justifiable only if the person concerned is responsible for their position. If birth, circumstance or disability results in inequality, then the person is entitled to compensation. Metaphysical arguments are often used to dispute luck egalitarianism. Arguments have been made that given metaphysical libertarianism, i.e. people have free will, those who are inherently lazy or reckless are just as deserving of compensation as the disabled. The article argues that luck egalitarianism can respond to metaphysical concerns by its superior accounting of the role of responsibility, which can be judged by an educated guess.
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.
