On the currency of egalitarian justice

Abstract

What aspect(s) of a person’s condition should count in a “fundamental” way for egalitarians, and not merely as cause of or evidence of or proxy for what they regard as fundamental? The author discusses answers to that question, and discussions bearing on it, by John Rawls, Ronald Dworkin, Thomas Scanlon, Amartya Sen and Richard Arneson. His own answer to the question is the product of an immanent critique of Dworkin, one, that is, which rejects Dworkin’s declared position (equality of resources) because it is not congruent with its own underlying motivation.