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
    The two core resourcist fairness norms cannot generally b... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The two core resourcist fairness norms cannot generally both be satisfied simultaneously

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.One norm requires that egalitarian transfers not vary depending on features for which a person is responsible
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Another norm requires that persons with identical non-responsible features be treated identically
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.In the general case, these two norms conflict
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Dworkin's auction-plus-insurance framework is specifically designed to reconcile ambition-sensitivity with endowment-insensitivity through a single hypothetical market mechanism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When both norms are grounded in the same counterfactual baseline—what rational agents would choose behind a veil of ignorance about their unchosen circumstances—apparent conflicts dissolve into differences in application rather than genuine logical incompatibility.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.G.A. Cohen's currency-of-egalitarianism analysis shows that shifting from resources to advantage as the equalisandum can preserve both norms simultaneously, since advantage-space allows responsible choices and brute luck to be tracked on a single metric.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The alleged conflict presupposes that resources must be the sole equalisandum, but this premise is precisely what the luck-egalitarian literature contests, meaning the incompatibility is an artifact of an unnecessarily restrictive framework rather than a deep logical truth.
      ?

      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 ResponsibilityRights & Liberty

    Related

    Another norm requires that persons with identical non-responsible features be tr...Dworkin's auction-plus-insurance framework is specifically designed to reconcile...G.A. Cohen's currency-of-egalitarianism analysis shows that shifting from resour...In the general case, these two norms conflict
    +3 moreShow less
    One norm requires that egalitarian transfers not vary depending on features for ...The alleged conflict presupposes that resources must be the sole equalisandum, b...When both norms are grounded in the same counterfactual baseline—what rational a...

    Similar

    When greater fulfillment of equal opportunity norms comes at the cost ...73%Wholehearted embrace of equal opportunity norms may be partly the prod...72%The interpretation that chimpanzees lack fairness sensitivity is incom...71%In the general case, these two norms conflict71%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: egalitarianism
    View source passageHide passage
    Setting to the side the details of Dworkin's construction, we can ask about the prospects of the general project he pursues. The starting point, which some had considered prior to Dworkin's contribution, is to consider what we should count as an equal distribution when people have different goods and they have different preferences over these goods. The basic idea is to treat as an equal distribution of resources one which no one prefers to alter—no one prefers any other person's pile of resourc
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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