This thesis shows that exploitation can arise from a just background, via just steps, when we exercise our moral rights. The theory rests on the idea that exploitation can arise via a special category of luck, which I call socially constructed luck. By taking into account what John Rawls calls background justice and what G.A. Cohen refers to as an accumulation problem, I argue that socially constructed luck is brought about through a cumulative process of people freely exercising their moral rights in the pursuit of their own conception of the good life. Unless the negative effects of this type of luck are offset, exploitative interactions can arise where people have no reasonable alternative but to enter a particular transaction. Socially constructed luck can play a direct role in privileging some individuals at the expense of others and allows for the extraction of surplus benefits. Importantly, by showing that luck egalitarianism should be understood within a conception of exploitation, the thesis not only provides a deeper understanding of how the luck egalitarian and relational egalitarian views align, but also justifies the introduction of a basic right to a reasonable alternative.

No description available.

In this thesis I argue that Adam Smith is committed to moral egalitarianism, which extends to his theory of political economy. While Smith’s work is often used to justify economic inequality in society, I show that his political theory is best understood as a kind of relational egalitarianism. Using Elizabeth Anderson’s Democratic Equality as a model, I examine Smith’s commitment to equality in the space of social relationships. In particular, I argue that Smith’s focus on eliminating inequalities that cause oppression in society in conjunction with his efforts to design a political and economic system that will yield social conditions of freedom for individuals make him a relational egalitarian.

One of the most active areas of debate in liberal theories of global justice regards the proper application of domestic egalitarian theories of distributive justice, such as that posed by John Rawls, at the scale of global considerations of need, remediation, and ultimately the development of a just order. This paper considers three popularly-referenced theories (that of Michael Blake, Andrea Sangiovanni, and Thomas Nagel) that each advance a variant of a more general thesis, sometimes referred to as ‘anti-cosmpolitan’ or ‘internationalist’ – that liberal egalitarian theories do not presently entail a uniform global principle of distribution that mandates material equality between all individuals, irrespective of their socio-political affiliations. Each theory is described in detail and representatives of major objections are evaluated along with potential responses, concluding with a finding that one interpretation of Blake’s theory appears to be the most promising avenue in developing the internationalist thesis.

In what follows, I engage in a wide-ranging discussion that captures the components of a metric of egalitarian justice (that is, the nature of the principles that specify what we aim to distribute equally) best designed to promote a minimally just state of affairs for not only, but principally, people with disabilities. First, I examine precisely what it is we mean when we refer to “disability”. I do this to ensure we have adequately deliberated over, and subsequently identified, the particular group of individuals for whom we aim to promote justice. I conclude this section by endorsing the so-called ‘interactional model’ of disability, and denying the accuracy of the ‘social model’. Second, I argue that while a focus on the capabilities approach can help provide us with an answer to the currency question that most closely approximates justice for the disabled, a minimally just state of affairs would nevertheless, fail to materialize should we opt to endorse such a conception of egalitarian justice. I point to the inability of the capabilities approach to: i) accurately identify and calculate degrees of need or injustice; ii) be adequately sensitive to the diverse natural endowments when assessing need; iii) acknowledge the special moral importance of health as well as various other functionings. Finally, I conclude that a focus on first and foremost, condition, rather than opportunity, can better weather the challenges I present against a capabilities framework. More specifically, I suspect that a focus on both material conditions, and substantive freedoms or opportunities, is necessary to provide an adequate minimal conception of justice. I will argue that there are a set of material conditions that are lexically prior to a group of opportunities that must also be afforded within a conception of justice, and that merely providing the opportunities for these conditions is inadequate. In other words, I suggest that there are indeed, some functionings that must be assured within a minimal conception of justice, regardless of the choices exercised surrounding the securing of those functionings. / Thesis (Ph.D, Philosophy) -- Queen's University, 2012-03-14 12:43:02.176

This study addressed the possible change in young adult attitudes toward family dynamics due to the shift from traditionalism to egalitarianism in recent decades. More specifically, it sought to explore young adult perceptions' of their parents' relational ideology (e.g., degree of traditionalism), and whether young adults perceived their relational ideology to be similar to their parents' ideology. It was predicted that high levels of traditionalism in young adults would be associated with low levels of relational efficacy, as defined by conflict styles and feelings of internal control over relationships. Social cognitive theory (Bandura, 2001) posits that children learn behavior modeled by parents, particularly behaviors that are rewarded. Hence, with the increase in more egalitarian attitudes modeled by parents, this study sought to determine the extent to which young adults are now acquiring and implementing primarily egalitarian rather than traditional attitudes. A path analysis revealed significant associations between parents' degree of traditionalism and offspring traditionalism, as well as significant associations between parents' degree of traditionalism and their distributive and integrative conflict styles. Further, young adult conflict strategies were associated with parents' conflict strategies, and were significantly associated with their internal locus of control. High levels of traditionalism in young adult women were negatively associated with their internal locus of control and positively associated with their psychological distress. It appears that women perceived their parents as more egalitarian, and used conflict styles more conducive to egalitarian relationships relative to men.

G.A. Cohen’s critique of John Rawls holds that it is insufficient to approach the problem of justice as one of principles governing laws and institutions alone. Instead, an appropriate social ethos must motivate the citizens to act from these principles in order to ensure that society is characterized by equality. The following will argue that Cohen’s concerns with Rawls are well-founded. However, even citizens motivated by a sense of justice will possess motives that are non-egoistic, yet inegalitarian in effect. Therefore, just citizens should not be expected to enact the same principles as just institutions. / Thesis (Master, Philosophy) -- Queen's University, 2012-10-02 08:20:09.804

No description available.

In recent years, there has been a move among Nietzsche scholars to attempt to smooth over many of Nietzsche's seemingly reprehensible moral attitudes, and in so doing, make Nietzsche's philosophy both less radical and more amicable to the existing moral ethos. Nowhere is this trend more apparent then as regards Nietzsche's stance on democracy and egalitarianism. The intent of this paper is to push back against this trend by demonstrating the necessary role Nietzsche's anti-democratic and anti-egalitarian stance plays in his overarching philosophical position. To do so, and in order to elucidate the core of Nietzsche's critique of democracy, two of the strongest proponents of what will be called the "reconciliatory project," Maudemarie Clark and David Owen, will be challenged. As will be demonstrated, Nietzsche is ultimately concerned with the aggrandizement of humanity, both in general and on an individual level, by allowing for radical competitive pluralism, tempered by the unifying greatness of his "higher" humans. This goal, in conjunction with his understanding of human flourishing, leads him to reject egalitarianism wholesale, and in so doing, any democracy rooted therein. This critique will be used to illuminate several of the defining characteristics of a political and social organization conducive to (and perhaps necessary for) the full realization of Nietzsche's ethical perfectionism. Consequently, my conclusions will largely concern the structure of a Nietzschean politics, not its content. This structure is roughly oligarchic, rooted in a culture steeped in agonalism.

Despite all of the attention given to it by researchers, scientists, educators, psychologists, sociologists, etc., bullying continues to permeate K-12 schools around the world. Statistics on K-12 bullying in the U.S. confirm that not only did bullying double in the ten years between 2001 and 2011 but these numbers are not getting smaller. This thesis provides a sampling of studies and programs that have been done or are being done to understand, reduce, prevent, and eliminate school bullying. The emphasis of the sampling is on the use of top-down, hierarchical value structures, designed to encourage youth to comply with the values of a dominant adult group; these underlying values are in direct contrast to the underlying values of egalitarianism and self-determination that are inherent in the goals of the current study, where sixth grade students learned about dialogue and how to communicate with each other in nurturing non-hierarchical environments.