Ethics - Revision history

Eric Rasmusen at 04:59, 26 June 2023

2023-06-26T04:59:39Z

Rasmusen p1vaim at 13:18, 25 April 2021

2021-04-25T13:18:50Z

Rasmusen p1vaim: Created page with "*G. A. Cohen, [https://link-springer-com.proxyiub.uits.iu.edu/content/pdf/10.1023/A:1009836317343.pdf "If You’re an Egalitarian, How Come You’re so Rich?,"] Journal of Et..."

2021-04-13T00:56:56Z

Created page with "*G. A. Cohen, [https://link-springer-com.proxyiub.uits.iu.edu/content/pdf/10.1023/A:1009836317343.pdf "If You’re an Egalitarian, How Come You’re so Rich?,"] Journal of Et..."

New page

*G. A. Cohen, [https://link-springer-com.proxyiub.uits.iu.edu/content/pdf/10.1023/A:1009836317343.pdf "If You’re an Egalitarian, How Come You’re so Rich?,"] Journal of Ethics 4, no. 1–2 (2000): 1–26.:
<blockquote style="color: gray">
According to John Rawls, and to liberals quite generally, principles
of justice apply to the rules of the basic structure of society, and not to
the choices people make within that structure, beyond their choices about whether or not to promote, support, and comply with, the rules of a just
basic structure.

It follows that some aims that are rightly pursued by government, whose
legislation and policy decide the character of at least a large part of the
basic structure, are not aims that citizens themselves can and/or should
be expected to pursue (apart from the pursuit of them in which citizens
engage when they support those aims politically). According to Rawls,
the demands placed by justice on government do not belong on the backs
of individuals, as such: individuals discharge those demands collectively,
through the government that represents them...

I have argued, against that position, that justice in personal choice,
within a just ethos, is necessary for a society to qualify as just....: I ask whether egalitarians who live in an unequal society
(one, that is, whose government, for whatever reason, fails to establish the
equality that these egalitarians favour) are committed to implementing, so
far as they can, in their own lives, the norm of equality that they prescribe
for government.
</blockquote>
I did not finish the article, but it is well written and worth reading.

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:18, 25 April 2021
Line 23:		Line 23:
	</blockquote>		</blockquote>
	I did not finish the article, but it is well written and worth reading.		I did not finish the article, but it is well written and worth reading.
		+
		+	==Pride, Victory, Malice, Boasting==
		+	What celebration is proper after a sports victory?
		+
		+	I think a lot of it is the difference between joy at your own positive accomplishment and malice at the pain of your adversary. The boundary is delicate, and the emotion usually a mix of the two.
		+
		+	This is highly relevant to pretty much all human accomplishment.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-*G. A. Cohen, [https://link-springer-com.proxyiub.uits.iu.edu/content/pdf/10.1023/A:1009836317343.pdf  "If You’re an Egalitarian, How Come You’re so Rich?,"] Journal of Ethics 4, no. 1–2 (2000): 1–26.:
+*[https://twitter.com/FeserEdward/status/1667671828163366913?t=FLfQjMLzYpB3sR5txF2VLQ&s=03 Edward Feser] said,"1/5 Aristotle famously distinguishes the weak-willed man (the akrates), who regrets his wrongdoing and can reform, from the licentious man (the akolastos), who is so thoroughly in love with immoral pleasures that he is incapable of perceiving, much less willing, what is good."
 <blockquote style="color: gray">
 According to John Rawls, and to liberals quite generally, principles