Abstract
Luck egalitarians need to address the question of cost-responsibility: If an individual is responsible for being worse off than others, then what benefits, if any, is that individual uniquely cost-responsible for? By applying luck egalitarianism to justice in health I discuss different answers to this question inspired by two different interpretations of luck egalitarianism, namely 'standard luck egalitarianism' and 'all luck egalitarianism', respectively. Even though I argue that the latter is more plausible than the former, I ultimately suggest and defend a third interpretation of luck egalitarianism, which I label 'universal luck egalitarianism'. Finally, I adjust my findings to a (all things considered) more plausible currency, namely welfare.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Journal | Journal of Applied Philosophy |
Volume | 31 |
Issue number | 3 |
Pages (from-to) | 271-286 |
ISSN | 1468-5930 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2014 |
Externally published | Yes |