Are egalitarians really vulnerable to the Levelling-Down Objection and the Divided World Example?
Subbu Subramanian ()
Additional contact information
Subbu Subramanian: Madras Institute of Development Studies
The Journal of Philosophical Economics, 2011, vol. 4, issue 2, 5-14
This essay is a quick critique of one aspect of Derek Parfit’s criticism of Egalitarianism in his larger consideration of the claims of, and distinction between, Prioritarianism and Egalitarianism. It reviews issues relating to the ‘Levelling Down Objection’ and the ‘Divided World Example’. More specifically, it is argued that the Levelling Down Objection is a serious problem only for Pure Telic Egalitarianism, not for Pluralist Telic Egalitarianism; and that even in a Divided World, one can have an egalitarian justification for preferring an equal distribution of a smaller sum of wellbeing to an unequal distribution of a larger sum. By these means, it is contended that Parfit’s claim of the vulnerability of Egalitarianism to the Levelling Down Objection and the Divided World Example is not sustainable.
Keywords: pure and pluralist telic egalitarianism; deontic egalitarianism; prioritarianism (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Z00 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations View citations in EconPapers (1) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bus:jphile:v:4:y:2011:i:2:p:5-14
Access Statistics for this article
The Journal of Philosophical Economics is currently edited by Valentin Cojanu
More articles in The Journal of Philosophical Economics from Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Series data maintained by Valentin Cojanu ().