Advertisement

Philosophical Studies

, Volume 162, Issue 3, pp 537–545 | Cite as

Smilansky, Arneson, and the asymmetry of desert

  • Jeffrey Moriarty
Article

Abstract

Desert plays an important role in most contemporary theories of retributive justice, but an unimportant role in most contemporary theories of distributive justice. Saul Smilansky has recently put forward a defense of this asymmetry. In this study, I argue that it fails. Then, drawing on an argument of Richard Arneson’s, I suggest an alternative consequentialist rationale for the asymmetry. But while this shows that desert cannot be expected to play the same role in distributive justice that it can play in retributive justice, it does not fully vindicate the asymmetry, since desert can still play an important role in the former.

Keywords

Asymmetry Desert Distributive justice Retributive justice 

Notes

Acknowledgments

For helpful comments on earlier versions of this study, I thank Richard Arneson and the participants at the Second Annual New Orleans Invitational Seminar in Ethics (NOISE), especially my commentator Simon Cabulea May.

References

  1. Alm, D. (2010). Desert and aggregation. Journal of Political Philosophy, 18(2), 156–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arneson, R. J. (1997). Egalitarianism and the undeserving poor. Journal of Political Philosophy, 5(4), 327–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arneson, R. J. (2007). Desert and equality. In N. Holtug & K. Lippert-Rasmussen (Eds.), Egalitarianism: New essays on the nature and value of equality (pp. 262–293). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Christman, J. (1988). Entrepreneurs, profits, and deserving market shares. Social Philosophy and Policy, 6(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cohen, G. A. (1989). On the currency of egalitarian justice. Ethics, 99(4), 906–944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hsieh, N.-H. (2000). Moral desert, fairness and legitimate expectations in the market. Journal of Political Philosophy, 8(1), 91–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hurka, T. (2003). Desert: Individualistic and holistic. In S. Olsaretti (Ed.), Desert and justice (pp. 45–68). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Husak, D. N. (2000). Holistic retributivism. California Law Review, 88(3), 991–1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Husak, D. N. (2008). Overcriminalization: The limits of the criminal law. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Kelly, E. I. (2009). Criminal justice without retribution. Journal of Philosophy, 106(8), 440–462.Google Scholar
  11. Kershnar, S. (2005). Giving capitalists their due. Economics and Philosophy, 21(1), 65–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Marx, K. (1986). In J. Elster (Ed.), Karl Marx: A reader. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Miller, D. (1999). Principles of social justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Miller, D. (2003). Comparative and noncomparative desert. In S. Olsaretti (Ed.), Desert and justice (pp. 25–44). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Mills, E. (2004). Scheffler on rawls, justice, and desert. Law and Philosophy, 23(3), 261–272.Google Scholar
  16. Moriarty, J. (2003). Against the asymmetry of desert. Noûs, 37(3), 518–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Olsaretti, S. (2004). Liberty, desert, and the market. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Scheffler, S. (1992). Responsibility, reactive attitudes, and liberalism in philosophy and politics. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 21(4), 299–323.Google Scholar
  19. Scheffler, S. (2000). Justice and desert in liberal theory. California Law Review, 88(3), 965–990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Scheffler, S. (2003). Distributive justice and economic desert. In S. Olsaretti (Ed.), Desert and justice (pp. 69–92). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Smilansky, S. (2006). Control, desert, and the difference between distributive and retributive justice. Philosophical Studies, 131(3), 511–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Temkin, L. S. (1993). Inequality. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Von Hirsch, A. (1993). Censure and sanctions. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. White, S. G. (2003). The civic minimum. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Philosophy DepartmentBentley UniversityWalthamUSA

Personalised recommendations