IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/utilit/v22y2010i02p134-147_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rawls's Thin (Millean) Defense of Private Property

Author

Listed:
  • PERSKY, JOSEPH

Abstract

This article suggests that Rawls's break with early utilitarians is not so much over the greatest happiness principle as it is over the relation of the institution of private property to justice. In this respect Rawls is very close to John Stuart Mill, arguing for a cleansed or tamed version of the institution. That said, Rawls's defense of private property remains very thin and highly idealized, again following Mill. If Hume and Bentham fail to demonstrate their claims, Rawls and Mill do little better. Rawls, like Mill, has constructed a challenging standard, admits to severe limitations on our empirical knowledge, and remains deeply ambivalent over the role of private property.

Suggested Citation

  • Persky, Joseph, 2010. "Rawls's Thin (Millean) Defense of Private Property," Utilitas, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 134-147, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:utilit:v:22:y:2010:i:02:p:134-147_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0953820810000051/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Katy Wells, 2016. "The right to personal property," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 15(4), pages 358-378, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:utilit:v:22:y:2010:i:02:p:134-147_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/uti .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.