Abstract
Abstract
Carl Knight argues that lexical sufficientarianism, which holds that sufficientarian concerns should have lexical priority over other distributive goals, is ‘excessive’ in many distinct ways and that sufficientarians should either defend weighted sufficientarianism or become prioritarians. In this article, I distinguish three types of weighted sufficientarianism and propose a weighted sufficientarian view that meets the excessiveness objection and is preferable to both Knight’s proposal and prioritarianism. More specifically, I defend a multi-threshold view which gives weighted priority to benefits directly above and below its thresholds, but gives benefits below the lowest threshold lexical priority over benefits above the highest threshold.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Economics and Econometrics,Philosophy
Reference18 articles.
1. The indispensability of sufficientarianism
2. Sufficiency: Restated and Defended
3. Why Sufficiency Is Not Enough
4. Sales-Heredia, F. 2003. Distributive criteria in the design of poverty alleviation programs: Mexico, 1992–2000. PhD thesis, University of Warwick.
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献