Making sense of age-group justice

Politics, Philosophy and Economics 15 (3):234-260 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article brings together two debates in contemporary political philosophy: on the one hand, the dispute between the distributive and relational approaches to equality and, on the other hand, the field of intergenerational equality. I offer an original contribution to the second domain and by doing so, I inform the first. The aim of this article is thus twofold: (1) shedding some light on an under-researched and yet crucial question – ‘which inequalities between generations matter?’ and (2) contributing to a far-reaching debate that touches upon the nature of egalitarianism. After showing that there are two key problems that fall within the scope of intergenerational equality – questions of justice between age groups and questions of equality between birth cohorts – I argue that, contrary to what the default distributive view (complete lives egalitarianism) states, some inequalities between age groups matter independently of their diachronic impact, and so partly for relational reasons. I argue that, even if we are distributive egalitarians, we must endorse the relational egalitarian conception to successfully make sense of some inequalities between age groups. I infer from this both that the putative view that the ‘relational’ conception of equality can be redescribed as distributive must be rejected and that the distributive view requires supplementation (but not necessarily displacement) by the relational view.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,486

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Taking equality seriously.Eva Maria Parisi - 2020 - Dissertation, Ludwig Maximilians Universität, München
Do We Have Relational Reasons to Care About Intergenerational Equality?Caleb Althorpe & Elizabeth Finneron-Burns - 2025 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy.
Relational egalitarianism.Rekha Nath - 2020 - Philosophy Compass 15 (7):1-12.
Why Relational Egalitarians Should Care About Distributions.Christian Schemmel - 2011 - Social Theory and Practice 37 (3):365-390.
The Distributive Demands of Relational Egalitarianism.Jan-Christoph Heilinger - 2024 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 27 (4):619-634.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-06-16

Downloads
162 (#147,865)

6 months
13 (#214,435)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Juliana Bidadanure
Stanford University

Citations of this work

Relational egalitarianism.Rekha Nath - 2020 - Philosophy Compass 15 (7):1-12.
Relational Justice: Egalitarian and Sufficientarian.Andreas Bengtson & Lasse Nielsen - 2023 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 40 (5):900-918.
The Distinctiveness of Relational Equality.Devon Cass - 2024 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics.
Relational egalitarianism, future generations, and arguments from overlap.Tim Meijers & Dick Timmer - forthcoming - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy.

View all 36 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Reasons and Persons.Derek Parfit - 1984 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
Justice as fairness: a restatement.John Rawls (ed.) - 2001 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
What is the point of equality.Elizabeth Anderson - 1999 - Ethics 109 (2):287-337.
Why We Should Reject S.Derek Parfit - 1984 - In Reasons and Persons. Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
The morality of freedom.J. Raz - 1986 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 178 (1):108-109.

View all 38 references / Add more references