List journal issues    
Home List journal issues Table of contents Subscribe to PAQ


Volume 30 • Number 3

July 2016



Individually Allocating Principles and Market Risks

by Tobey Scharding

In a tightly argued but underappreciated paper, "How Should Egalitarians Cope with Market Risks?," Anderson develops and clarifies some of the criticisms she raised against luck egalitarianism in her influential paper, "What Is the Point of Equality?" Luck egalitarianism is the view, roughly speaking, that brute luck should not determine people's socio-economic outcomes. Brute luck is defined as the haphazard events that randomly happen to people through no fault or choice of their own. If haphazard events should not determine people's outcomes, then what should? Anderson discusses two alternatives: a "desert-catering" view (DES-LE) and a "responsibility-catering" view (RES-LE). According to the former interpretation of luck egalitarianism, people should deserve their outcomes (rather than having their outcomes just happen to them). On the latter view, people should be responsible for their outcomes.

view PDF



Home | Issue Index
© 2016 by the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois
Content in Public Affairs Quarterly is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the Public Affairs Quarterly database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.

ISSN: 2152-0542