Part 1B - Political Philosophy - Equality - Lecture 1 ... · Part 1B Paper 7: Political Philosophy...
Transcript of Part 1B - Political Philosophy - Equality - Lecture 1 ... · Part 1B Paper 7: Political Philosophy...
Part 1B Paper 7: Political Philosophy / Equality Lecture 1: Equality of What?
Chris Thompson [email protected]
1
Overview of the lectures
1. Equality of what? – Welfare and resources 2. Equality of what ? – Opportunity 3. The value of equality 4. Rawls 5. Nozick 6. IncenLves and efficiency and PosiLve
DiscriminaLon
2
Readings
• *DWORKIN, R., ‘What Is Equality? Part 2: Equality of Resources', Philosophy & Public Affairs, 10(4): 283-‐345.
• ARNESON, R., 'Equality and Equal Opportunity for Welfare', Philosophical Studies, 56 (1989): 77-‐93.
• COHEN, G.A., 'On the Currency of Egalitarian JusLce', Ethics, 99 (1989): 906-‐44.
• DWORKIN, R., 'What Is Equality?: Part 1: Equality of Welfare’, Philosophy & Public Affairs 10(3):
• SEN, A., 'Equality of What?’ , Tanner Lectures on Human Values Vol.I (1980).
3
1. The noLon of equality
• Just like liberty, freedom and democracy, (most) people are in favour of equality (of some sort).
• Equality is a contested concept (cf. liberty). • Equality is a relaLonal noLon – equality between whom?
• Also need to specify what it is that we should equalise. Presumably we don’t care about equality between people in all things – then you get idenLty.
6
1. The noLon of equality
• Equality has important poliLcal and moral connotaLons: – JusLce as equality before the law – JusLce as democraLc equality: ‘neutrality’, ‘anonymity’.
• Equality also has important connotaLons for distribuLonal jusLce*. Here we are interested in economic and social equality.
• ‘Why equality?’ – we will deal with this quesLon later.
* Although we could argue that poliLcal and legal ‘goods’ are distribuLonal in nature as well.
7
1. The noLon of equality
• If we fix the ‘who’ quesLon to adult members of a given state, the ‘equality of what?’ quesLon has a number of possible answers: – Equality of welfare – Equality of resources – Equality of opportunity
• For what goods, under what condiLons, is equality jusLfied? For what goods, under what condiLons, is inequality jusLfied?
8
1. The noLon of equality
• What might jusLfy unequal treatment: – Property rights (Nozick) – Disability (Rawls) – Desert (Nozick) – Efficiency (Rawls)
• Later lectures…
9
2. Equality of welfare
Beliefs + Desires = Decisions
Higher order desires
Lower order desires
Autonomy
Acts
Outcomes
Constraints Liberty
11
2. Equality of welfare
Beliefs + Desires = Decisions
Higher order desires
Lower order desires
Autonomy
Acts
Outcomes
Constraints Liberty
12
2. Equality of welfare
• PosiLve freedom is about how many doors are open to you. • NegaLve freedom is about whether they are locked. • Both posiLve and negaLve freedom are about the acLons
you do/ can take. • Your welfare is enhanced when you find what you want
behind the doors.
Metaphor of the doors
13
2. Equality of welfare
• Welfare is the saLsfacLon of preferences. – When you get the state of the world that you want.
– When the outcomes are in line with your desires.
• AlternaLvely, welfare is a hedonisLc state. • If we are asking ‘equality of what?’, then surely welfare is the ‘what’ that we really care about.
14
2. Equality of welfare
1. The problem of offensive tastes: – Suppose you have a preference for something other people find distasteful e.g. harming animals. Why should others help you saLsfy such preferences?
15
2. Equality of welfare
2. The problem of expensive tastes – Suppose a father is wriLng a will and has three sons who may inherit his goods.
– Alan has culLvated a taste for expensive wine and caviar.
– Brian is happy with beer and chips. – Carl has a physical disability that affects his mobility. – The father may be happy to give more money to Carl, so that Carl and Brian have equality of welfare.
– But why should the father give more money to Alan rather than Brian?
16
Dworkin: a shipwreck and an island
• Suppose a group of people are shipwrecked on an island with abundant resources.
• The group agree that antecedently no one is enLtled to any parLcular piece of property.
• Envy test – no division of resources is equal if any immigrant would prefer some other immigrant’s bundle of resources to his own.
• A single agent would not be able to divide up the resources adequately: – A milking cow cannot be divided – Some combinaLons of goods in bundles suit some rather than others
18
3. Equality of resources
An aucLon
• The soluLon is to have an aucLon. • Everyone gets the same number of tokens (clam shells).
This serves as a metric for equality of resources. • Every item (land, milking cows…) is put up for aucLon. • Bidders can ask that any porLon of a good (e.g. a
subdivision of land) be placed separately on the aucLon. • The lots are then sold to the highest bidder. • The envy test will be met. No one would prefer to have
someone else’s bundle, because by hypothesis they had the opportunity to buy it.
• No one will be unhappy with the make-‐up of their bundle, because they added items to it themselves.
19
3. Equality of resources
Equality of resources vs. welfare
• Someone can sLll think themselves unlucky: – The island does not grow the fruits they like. – A lot of people share the same tastes and so the bidding is intense
• But these concerns relate to equality of welfare. • Under equality of resources people must make choices in light of scarcity.
• It is OK if our choices impact on others (we outbid them); we are not acLng unjustly, since equality has already been established.
20
3. Equality of resources
Inequality again…
• Arer the aucLon has concluded, people can then get on with their lives, produce things, and trade.
• The iniLal equal distribuLon of resources will quickly be disrupted: – Some are more skilled producers than others. – Some work harder than others. – Some will get sick. Some will have their crops destroyed.
• Before too long the envy test will no longer hold. As such, we no longer have equality of resources.
21
3. Equality of resources
Luck
• OpLon luck – the result of how deliberate choices pan out. E.g. Which crop to plant.
• Brute luck – the result of risks that you do not deliberaLvely choose. E.g. The weather.
22
3. Equality of resources
Luck
• It seems fair to hold people responsible for opLon luck, but what about brute luck? If one farmer plants a crop that survives the storm, whereas another farmer’s crop is ruined, is the inequality in resources just?
23
3. Equality of resources
Luck
• It seems fair to hold people responsible for opLon luck, but what about brute luck? If one farmer plants a crop that survives the storm, whereas another farmer’s crop is ruined, is the inequality in resources just?
• Insurance provides a link between opLon and brute luck. E.g. farmers have the opLon of purchasing insurance against adverse weather events.
• We can suppose, for example, that sighted people can choose to purchase accident insurance during the iniLal aucLon. No need to redistribute.
24
3. Equality of resources
DisabiliLes
• But what about disabiliLes? You can’t buy insurance against pre-‐exisLng condiLons.
25
3. Equality of resources
DisabiliLes
• But what about disabiliLes? You can’t buy insurance against pre-‐exisLng condiLons.
• HypotheLcal insurance market. Determine how much people would be prepared to pay for insurance against various condiLons. Fund the equivalent of this insurance via taxaLon.
26
3. Equality of resources
A lack of talent
• But what about those born with a lack of talent? • This is trickier. • It is difficult to be precise about how much a lack of talent might be a disadvantage.
• A hypotheLcal insurance market against the risk of not being a superstar would offer insurance that is bad value.
• A hypotheLcal insurance market might produce good value products against being very disadvantaged. A minimum income guarantee?
28
3. Equality of resources
Summary
• So how does equality of resources (ala Dworkin) fare?
• The major problem with equality of welfare is people culLvaLng expensive tastes. – The aucLon holds people responsible for their preference formaLon.
– The hypotheLcal insurance markets place an upper limit on the amount of compensaLon due to people with disabiliLes or a lack of talent.
30
3. Equality of resources