Input and output in distributive theory.
Distributive theories evaluate distributions of goods based on candidate recipients' characteristics, e.g. how well off candidates are, how deserving they are, and whether they fare below sufficiency. But such characteristics vary across possible worlds, so distributive theories may differ in terms...
| Published in: | Nous (0029-4624) Vol. 57; no. 1; pp. 3 - 26 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , |
| Format: | Article |
| Published: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Mar2023
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | View this record in EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=162509899&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 162509899 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00294624 D97 jtl: Nous (0029-4624) issn: 00294624 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Mar2023 vid: 57 iid: 1 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell artinfo: ui: 162509899 10.1111/nous.12392 ppf: 3 ppct: 23 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 266KB tig: atl: Input and output in distributive theory. aug: au: Eyal, Nir Herlitz, Anders affil: Center for Population‐Level Bioethics, Philosophy (SAS), and HBSP (SPH), Rutgers University, New Brunswick NJ,, USA Institute for Futures Studies, Holländargatan, Stockholm, Sweden su: Physical distribution of goods Distributive justice Grounded theory Counterfactuals (Logic) sug: subj: Physical distribution of goods Distributive justice Grounded theory Counterfactuals (Logic) keyword: Counterfactuals Egalitarianism Prioritarianism ab: Distributive theories evaluate distributions of goods based on candidate recipients' characteristics, e.g. how well off candidates are, how deserving they are, and whether they fare below sufficiency. But such characteristics vary across possible worlds, so distributive theories may differ in terms of the world which for them settles candidates' characteristics. This paper examines how distributive theories differ in terms of whether candidate recipients' relevant characteristics are grounded in the possible world that would take place if the distributor does not intervene (call it the "input" world) or if they are grounded in each possible world that the distributor can bring about through different decisions (call each an "output" world). We illustrate the importance of this distinction in relation to one distributive theory, prioritarianism. As we show, both input and output versions of prioritarianism are plausible interpretations of the literature, and there are good reasons to take input prioritarianism seriously. Ultimately, however, we argue that input prioritarianism should be rejected. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Nous (0029-4624) is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Nous (0029-4624) holder: Wiley-Blackwell dt: @attributes: year: 2023 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|