IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/hop/hopeec/v45y2013i2p287-309.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Utilitarianism and Luck

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph Persky

Abstract

The study of luck in moral and political philosophy has generated two camps: the ``luck egalitarians,'' who see justice as demanding aggressive efforts to reduce inequalities produced by luck broadly conceived, and the advocates of ``democratic equality,'' who emphasize traditional liberal political values. Most of this literature has been ahistorical and hostile to utilitarianism. This essay aims at repositioning the luck debates in the context of John Stuart Mill's oft maligned essay, Utilitarianism. There, Mill posits that the historical progress of justice works against all types of social expediency, thus reducing the role of luck in human affairs. Over time, justice requires a move from ``democratic equality'' to the achievement of ``luck egalitarianism.'' Rather than viewing these as competing approaches to justice, this reading of Mill views them as succeeding stages in the conquest of poverty and the historical achievement of justice. These themes in Utilitarianism also go far toward reconciling that essay with Mill's utilitarian roots.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph Persky, 2013. "Utilitarianism and Luck," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 45(2), pages 287-309, Summer.
  • Handle: RePEc:hop:hopeec:v:45:y:2013:i:2:p:287-309
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hope.dukejournals.org/content/45/2/287.full.pdf+html
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Margaret Schabas, 2015. "John Stuart Mill: evolutionary economics and liberalism," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 97-111, April.

    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:hop:hopeec:v:45:y:2013:i:2:p:287-309. 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: Center for the History of Political Economy Webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.dukeupress.edu/Catalog/ViewProduct.php?viewby=journal&productid=45614 .

    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.