|
Showing 1 - 2 of
2 matches in All Departments
The concept of desert, which once enjoyed a central place in
political and ethical theory, has been relegated to the margins of
much of contemporary theory, if not excluded altogether. Recently a
renewed interest in the topic has emerged, and several philosophers
have argued that the notion merits a more central place in
political and ethical theory. Some of these philosophers contend
that justice exists to the extent that people receive exactly what
they deserve, while others argue that desert should replace such
considerations as rights, need, and equality as the basis for
distributions. Still others argue that morality involves a fitting
match between one's moral character and a degree of happiness. All
of these positions have encountered opposition from egalitarians,
libertarians, and those who are skeptical about the coherence of
the concept of desert.
The first anthology of its kind, What Do We Deserve? is a balanced
collection of readings that brings sharply opposing positions and
arguments together and stimulates debate over the meaning and
significance of desert in current thought. The book begins with
eight classical readings on desert (by Plato, Aristotle, Hobbes,
Smith, Kant, Mill, Sidgwick, and Ross), and later turns to
contemporary interpretations of the issue. The selections examine
the concept itself, analyze its relationship to the ideas of
freedom and responsibility, engage in the debate between John Rawls
and his critics on the merits of desert, and, finally, study the
wider role and significance of desert in political and ethical
theory.
|
You may like...
Activity
Paperback
R64
R34
Discovery Miles 340
Woolf
Alex Latimer, Patrick Latimer
Paperback
(3)
R221
R166
Discovery Miles 1 660
|
Email address subscribed successfully.
A activation email has been sent to you.
Please click the link in that email to activate your subscription.