Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Luck egalitarian policy recommendations are unjustifiably... — Carmelics
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Luck egalitarian policy recommendations are unjustifiably harsh toward individuals who fare badly and are deemed personally responsible for their situation.

    Justice & PunishmentMoral Responsibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Luck egalitarianism requires institutional actors to make intrusive judgments about whether individuals' choices were truly 'free' and uncoerced.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Elizabeth Anderson argues such judgments treat unfortunate individuals as objects of pity and scrutiny rather than as equals deserving dignity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A distributive principle that systematically demeans its recipients in practice cannot be justified by its theoretical commitment to equality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Gerald Cohen's 'expensive tastes' problem shows luck egalitarianism must compensate some cultivated preferences, revealing its choice-tracing logic is incoherent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the line between unchosen circumstance and chosen preference cannot be principled, then denying aid based on 'choice' is arbitrary and therefore unjust.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Luck egalitarian principles imply that individuals deemed personally responsible for their bad outcomes are not owed equalizing compensation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Withholding compensation from individuals who fare badly due to their own choices produces outcomes that are too harsh.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Moral ResponsibilityJustice & Punishment

    Connections

    1 topic

    Consequentialism1 linked

    Related

    A distributive principle that systematically demeans its recipients in practice ...Elizabeth Anderson argues such judgments treat unfortunate individuals as object...Gerald Cohen's 'expensive tastes' problem shows luck egalitarianism must compens...If the line between unchosen circumstance and chosen preference cannot be princi...
    +3 moreShow less
    Luck egalitarian principles imply that individuals deemed personally responsible...Luck egalitarianism requires institutional actors to make intrusive judgments ab...Withholding compensation from individuals who fare badly due to their own choice...

    Similar

    Luck egalitarian principles imply that individuals deemed personally r...84%To establish that a badly-off person is owed equalizing compensation, ...79%Withholding compensation from individuals who fare badly due to their ...78%One can affirm luck egalitarianism — that people should be equal in th...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: egalitarianism
    View source passageHide passage
    The ideal of a just modern society as a democratic society in which citizens relate as equals appears in writings by Michael Walzer on social justice (Walzer, 1983). Elizabeth Anderson and Samuel Scheffler both affirm versions of relational equality and from this standpoint criticize the family of views that Anderson calls “luck egalitarian,” whose foremost exponents are perhaps G. A. Cohen and Ronald Dworkin (Cohen 1989, Anderson 1999, Scheffler 2010, chapters 7 and 8, Dworkin 2000, and for res
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit