Abstract
This chapter responds to Robert Huseby’s critique that instrumental limitarianism is not genuinely limitarian. I first introduce the distinction between problem-driven versus theory-driven philosophy, which is relevant for assessing my earlier work on limitarianism. I then provide a restatement and refinement of limitarianism based on recent developments in the literature. I then argue that limitarianism is distinct from egalitarianism, as well as from sufficientarianism. Limitarianism fits well as one part of a pluralist account of distributive justice. I conclude by arguing that limitarianism could play a distinct role both within political philosophy, as well as within society.
Funder
European Research Council
Reference39 articles.
1. The Top 1 Percent in International and Historical Perspective;Alvaredo, Facundo; Atkinson, Anthony B; Piketty, Thomas; Saez, Emmanuel;Journal of Economic Perspectives,2013
2. Atkinson, Anthony B. & Piketty, Thomas. 2007. Top Incomes over the 20th Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3. Axelsen, David & Nielsen, Lasse. 2021. Why we should worry about extreme wealth. MS: University of Essex.
4. Brouwer, Huub & van der Deijl, Willem. 2021. More onerous work deserves higher pay. In Anders Örtenblad (Ed.), Debating Equal Pay for All (pp. 55−98). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
5. Why Sufficiency Is Not Enough;Casal, Paula;Ethics,2007