Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Ethics and Political Philosophy Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Ethics and Political Philosophy
And Justice For All: Viewing The Wealth Of Three United States Billionaires Through Three Theories Of Distributive Justice, Andrew Nahhas
And Justice For All: Viewing The Wealth Of Three United States Billionaires Through Three Theories Of Distributive Justice, Andrew Nahhas
Honors Projects
Wealth inequality in the United States has now hit levels not last seen since the 1920s. With this, has come a general disagreement over how to address this inequality, as well as a debate on whether it’s even an issue. Since no clear consensus has been reached, a theory that describes what is just and what is unjust wealth accumulation is needed. By summarizing the theories of traditional Libertarianism, left libertarianism and Luck Egalitarianism, and applying them to the fortunes of Oprah Winfrey, Richard Sackler and Jeff Bezos, this paper arrives at the conclusion that a version of traditional Libertarianism …
Politics For Angels, William Kanwischer
Politics For Angels, William Kanwischer
Honors Projects
How many idealizing assumptions may we make when doing political philosophy? May we assume our citizens more rational than they are, or our governments more efficient than in reality? These questions lie at the center of the debate between ideal and non-ideal theorists. Ideal theorists believe it permissible to engage in counterfactual assumptions about citizens and states when doing political philosophy, and non-ideal theorists think the opposite. In this paper, I will argue against a particular defense of ideal theory given by David Estlund, who argues that the low probability that a standard of justice will be met does not …
Justifying A Standard Of Death, Michael Milhim
Justifying A Standard Of Death, Michael Milhim
Honors Projects
There are three major positions in the legal definition of death debate: the cardio-pulmonary standard, the whole-brain standard, and the higher-brain standard. Prominent arguments for each standard appeal to a theory of human persistence. I’ll contend that these arguments fail for two reasons: the metaphysical underpinnings of the arguments are not decisive, and even if they are decisive, they may not be the right policy to enact. The later of these is more practically important than the former.