Egalitarian justice and expected value

Knight, C. (2013) Egalitarian justice and expected value. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 16(5), pp. 1061-1073. (doi:10.1007/s10677-013-9415-6)

Knight, C. (2013) Egalitarian justice and expected value. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 16(5), pp. 1061-1073. (doi:10.1007/s10677-013-9415-6)

[img]
Preview
Text
76960.pdf - Accepted Version

166kB

Abstract

According to all-luck egalitarianism, the differential distributive effects of both brute luck, which defines the outcome of risks which are not deliberately taken, and option luck, which defines the outcome of deliberate gambles, are unjust. Exactly how to correct the effects of option luck is, however, a complex issue. This article argues that (a) option luck should be neutralized not just by correcting luck among gamblers, but among the community as a whole, because it would be unfair for gamblers as a group to be disadvantaged relative to non-gamblers by bad option luck; (b) individuals should receive the warranted expected results of their gambles, except insofar as individuals blamelessly lacked the ability to ascertain which expectations were warranted; and (c) where societal resources are insufficient to deliver expected results to gamblers, gamblers should receive a lesser distributive share which is in proportion to the expected results. Where all-luck egalitarianism is understood in this way, it allows risk-takers to impose externalities on non-risk-takers, which seems counterintuitive. This may, however, be an advantage as it provides a luck egalitarian rationale for assisting ‘negligent victims’.

Item Type:Articles
Additional Information:The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com
Status:Published
Refereed:Yes
Glasgow Author(s) Enlighten ID:Knight, Dr Carl
Authors: Knight, C.
College/School:College of Social Sciences > School of Social and Political Sciences > Politics
Journal Name:Ethical Theory and Moral Practice
Publisher:Springer Netherlands
ISSN:1386-2820
ISSN (Online):1572-8447
Published Online:21 February 2013
Copyright Holders:Copyright © 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
First Published:First published in Ethical Theory and Moral Practice
Publisher Policy:Reproduced in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher

University Staff: Request a correction | Enlighten Editors: Update this record