Dear Students, Study Pecorino text (embedded) - Go to Chapter 9 - Study Social Philosophy  Study all types of Distributive Justice (6 or 7 total) Summarize each in one sentence . Produce examples for each. _____________________________________________ You are required to respond to the assignment question posted above with no less than 100 words. To support your response you are required to provide at least one supporting reference with proper citation. Your response will be reviewed by Unicheck , the plagiarism tool synced to Canvas. Unicheck will submit a similarity report a few minutes after you post your assignment. If similarity index is above 30%, please redo and resubmit your assignment after you cite the sources properly to avoid plagiarism.  Please review the PowerPoint slides explaining how to avoid plagiarism and post your assignment accordingly. Even a single plagiarized statement will not be tolerated.  APA writing format is recommended.  Thanks. Social Philosophy he principle question for social philosophy is:     Who gets what???? This matter is known as DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE.  Just how are the goods and services within any society to be distributed?   In any society no matter how small (an island society) or how large (the People’s Republic of China) there will arise the question of how goods and services are to be distributed.  Whether people will be free to work and keep what they earn or whether all must contribute in some way to the welfare of others, particularly those not capable of working and caring for themselves.  Below there are a number of principles which have been developed in response to this problem of deciding how social life is to be regulated and people are to be cared for. Read these and note the differences.  Please READ: On Distributive Justice: There are different theories of how to make the basic distribution.  Among them are: 1. Scope and Role of Distributive Principles 2. Strict Egalitarianism 3. The Difference Principle 4. Equality of Opportunity and Luck Egalitarianism 5. Welfare-Based Principles 6. Desert-Based Principles 7. Libertarian Principles 8. Feminist Principles There are different theories of how to make the basic distribution.  Among them are: Strict Egalitarianism One of the simplest principles of distributive justice is that of strict, or radical, equality. The principle says that every person should have the same level of material goods and services. The principle is most commonly justified on the grounds that people are morally equal and that equality in material goods and services is the best way to give effect to this moral ideal. The Difference Principle The most widely discussed theory of distributive justice in the past four decades has been that proposed by John Rawls in A Theory of Justice , (Rawls 1971), and Political Liberalism , (Rawls 1993). Rawls proposes the following two principles of justice: ·  1. Each person has an equal claim to.

1. Dear Students,
Study Pecorino text (embedded) - Go to Chapter 9 - Study
Social Philosophy
Study all types of Distributive Justice (6 or 7 total)
Summarize each in
one sentence
. Produce examples for each.
_____________________________________________
You are required to respond to the assignment question posted
above with no less than 100 words. To support your response
you are required to provide at least one supporting reference
with proper citation. Your response will be reviewed by
Unicheck
, the plagiarism tool synced to Canvas.
Unicheck
will submit a similarity report a few minutes after you post
your assignment. If similarity index is above 30%, please redo
and resubmit your assignment after you cite the sources
properly to avoid plagiarism. Please review the PowerPoint
slides explaining how to avoid plagiarism and post your
assignment accordingly. Even a single plagiarized statement
will not be tolerated. APA writing format is recommended.
Thanks.

2. Social Philosophy
he principle question for social philosophy is:
Who gets what????
This matter is known as DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE. Just how
are the goods and services within any society to be
distributed? In any society no matter how small (an island
society) or how large (the People’s Republic of China) there
will arise the question of how goods and services are to be
distributed. Whether people will be free to work and keep what
they earn or whether all must contribute in some way to the
welfare of others, particularly those not capable of working and
caring for themselves. Below there are a number of principles
which have been developed in response to this problem of
deciding how social life is to be regulated and people are to be
cared for. Read these and note the differences.
Please READ:
On Distributive Justice:
There are different theories of how to make the basic
distribution. Among them are:
1. Scope and Role of Distributive Principles
2. Strict Egalitarianism
3. The Difference Principle
4. Equality of Opportunity and Luck Egalitarianism
5. Welfare-Based Principles

3. 6. Desert-Based Principles
7. Libertarian Principles
8. Feminist Principles
There are different theories of how to make the basic
distribution. Among them are:
Strict Egalitarianism
One of the simplest principles of distributive justice is that of
strict, or radical, equality. The principle says that every person
should have the same level of material goods and services. The
principle is most commonly justified on the grounds that people
are morally equal and that equality in material goods and
services is the best way to give effect to this moral ideal.
The Difference Principle
The most widely discussed theory of distributive justice in the
past four decades has been that proposed by John Rawls in
A Theory of Justice
, (Rawls 1971), and
Political Liberalism
, (Rawls 1993). Rawls proposes the following two principles of
justice:
· 1. Each person has an equal claim to a fully adequate scheme
of equal basic rights and liberties, which scheme is compatible
with the same scheme for all; and in this scheme the equal
political liberties, and only those liberties, are to be guaranteed
their fair value.

4. · 2. Social and economic inequalities are to satisfy two
conditions: (a) They are to be attached to positions and offices
open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity; and
(b), they are to be to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged
members of society. (Rawls 1993, pp. 5–6. The principles are
numbered as they were in Rawls' original
A Theory of Justice
.)
Equality of Opportunity and Luck Egalitarianism
Dworkin proposed that people begin with equal resources but be
allowed to end up with unequal economic benefits as a result of
their own choices. What constitutes a just material distribution
is to be determined by the result of a thought experiment
designed to model fair distribution. Suppose that everyone is
given the same purchasing power and each uses that purchasing
power to bid, in a fair auction, for resources best suited to their
life plans. They are then permitted to use those resources as
they see fit. Although people may end up with different
economic benefits, none of them is given less consideration
than another in the sense that if they wanted somebody else's
resource bundle they could have bid for it instead.
In Dworkin's proposal we see his attitudes to ‘ambitions’ and
‘endowments’ which have become a central feature of luck
egalitarianism (though under a wide variety of alternative
names and further subset-distinctions). In terms of sensitivity to
‘ambitions’, Dworkin and many other luck egalitarians argue
that provided people have an ‘equal’ starting point (in
Dworkin's case, resources) they should live with the
consequences of their choices. They argue, for instance, that
people who choose to work hard to earn more income should not
be required to subsidize those choosing more leisure and hence

5. less income.
Welfare-Based Principles
Welfare-based principles are motivated by the idea that what is
of primary moral importance is the level of welfare of people.
Advocates of welfare-based principles view the concerns of
other theories — material equality, the level of primary goods
of the least advantaged, resources, desert-claims, or liberty —
as derivative concerns. They are only valuable in so far as they
affect welfare, so that all distributive questions should be
settled entirely by how the distribution affects welfare.
However, there are many ways that welfare can be used in
answering these distributive questions, so welfare-theorists need
to specify what welfare function they believe should be
maximized. The welfare functions proposed vary according to
what will count as welfare and the weighting system for that
welfare. Economists defending some form of welfarism
normally state the explicit functional form, while philosophers
often avoid this formality, concentrating on developing their
theories in answer to two questions: 1) the question of what has
intrinsic value, and 2) the question of what actions or policies
would maximize the intrinsic value. Moreover, philosophers
tend to restrict themselves to a small subset of the available
welfare functions. Although there are a number of advocates of
alternative welfare functions (such as ‘equality of well-being’),
most philosophical activity has concentrated on a variant known
as utilitarianism. This theory can be used to illustrate most of
the main characteristics of welfare-based principles.
Desert-Based Principles
The different
desert
-based principles of distribution differ primarily according to
what they identify as the basis for deserving. While Aristotle
proposed virtue, or moral character, to be the best desert-basis
for economic distribution, contemporary desert theorists have

6. proposed desert-bases that are more practically implemented in
complex modern societies. Most contemporary desert theorists
have pursued John Locke's lead in this respect. Locke argued
people deserve to have those items produced by their toil and
industry, the products (or the value thereof) being a fitting
reward for their effort (see Miller 1989). Locke's underlying
idea was to guarantee to individuals the fruits of their own labor
and abstinence. Most contemporary proposals for desert-bases
fit into one of three broad categories:
Contribution: People should be rewarded for their work activity
according to the value of their contribution to the social
product. (Miller 1976, Miller 1989, Riley 1989)
Effort: People should be rewarded according to the effort they
expend in their work activity (Sadurski 1985a,b, Milne 1986).
Compensation: People should be rewarded according to the
costs they incur in their work activity (Dick 1975, Lamont
1997).
Libertarian Principles
The market will be just, not as a means to some pattern, but
insofar as the exchanges permitted in the market satisfy the
conditions of just acquisition and exchange described by the
principles. For libertarians, just outcomes are those arrived at
by the separate just actions of individuals; a particular
distributive pattern is not required for justice. Robert Nozick
has advanced this version of libertarianism (Nozick 1974), and
is its best known contemporary advocate.
Nozick proposes a 3-part “Entitlement Theory”.
If the world were wholly just, the following definition would

7. exhaustively cover the subject of justice in holdings:
a. A person who acquires a holding in accordance with the
principle of justice in acquisition is entitled to that holding.
b. A person who acquires a holding in accordance with the
principle of justice in transfer, from someone else entitled to
the holding, is entitled to the holding.
c. No one is entitled to a holding except by (repeated)
applications of (a) and (b).
The complete principle of distributive justice would say simply
that a distribution is just if everyone is entitled to the holdings
they possess under the distribution (Nozick, p.151).
All this from--
On Distributive Justice:
Consider some matter of importance to us today that relates to
the question of the distribution of goods and services. Apply
any of the social theories you have read about and take a
position on it. For example,
The distribution of the funds of the charities to the victims of
the 9-11 Disaster, how should the federal money be distributed?
What principle of distributive justice do you favor using.
Read how the money was distributed.
$7 Billion for the Grief of Sept. 11
There are a variety of social situations that result from the
application of these principles or from a combination of the
principles. The range of variations is quite broad and includes

8. communist states and democratic states. It includes societies
that have great concern for individual welfare and those that
have great concern for the common welfare. It includes those
that have liberal as well as conservative orientations. What
does this mean?
We shall contrast two rather different approaches to the matter
of distribution in the next section: Liberalism and
Conservatism
The debate between liberals and conservatives is quite active in
contemporary society. How much you pay in taxes of all types
is the outcome of that ongoing debate. There are many other
ways in which the ideas associated with those social and
political views have consequences in the lives of all members of
society. It is important to have some idea of the meaning of
those terms and the ideas associated with those movements.
Today the term 'liberal' has come to be associated with a variety
of principles, concepts and programs. Liberals are often
associated with ideas related to a WELFARE STATE and a
system of taxes, subsidies, deductions, payments, regulations,
restrictions, permissions, refunds, entitlements and other such
ideas and programs. The term was not always so associated.
Liberal meant to "liberate" or "free" and as applied to social
questions meant that individuals should be as free from
interference from the government as possible. There were and
remain a number of theories that are based upon placing a very
high value on human AUTONOMY, freedom or liberty. In
social affairs it was taken to mean that individuals were to
remain free to pursue their own interests and to work and to
keep the results of their labor, that individuals had a right to
property and to pursuit of what would make the happy. The

9. ideas of the Utilitarians, Bentham and the Mills, contributed
heavily to this view of how social life ought to be arranged.
Along with it came the idea that government should not
interfere with individual’s earnings and with businesses. There
was the idea of Laissez- Faire economics. These ideas were
supportive of capitalism.
Links on
Capitalism
Many of these ideas are linked to what are called
"conservatives" in contemporary American society.
READ:
CONSERVATIVISM
Among the most radical defenders of this view has been Ayn
Rand and her ideas which are titled:
OBJECTIVISM.
Links related to Ayn Rand
Her views oppose state regulations as a form of collective
interference. She is opposed to socialism and to all forms of
collectivism and the Marxist ideal of taking from each
according to ability and providing to each according to need
READ:
COLLECTIVISM
:
Links on Collectivism:
Chronology
:

10. Critique:
"
COLLECTIVISM:" THE TWIN BROTHER OF SOCIALISM!
By Peter W. Hauer
SOCIAL LIBERALISM
- This view holds that the division of social product is best left
to impersonal, efficient, decentralized workings of free market.
It is based on a number of assumptions including that people
act out of enlightened self-interest and that they are not only
autonomous agents but also prudent rational agents.
READ:
LIBERALISM
READ:
LIBERALISM
In contemporary American society many liberals came to argue
for more government intervention and their ideas came to be
accepted by legislators and by the Supreme Court, when the
Court sustained one act of New Deal legislation after another,
asserting that individual citizens must be protected against
overpowering economic groups and from disasters they have not
brought on themselves. More and more laws were passed to
provide for old-age and survivors insurance, unemployment
insurance, federal control of various financial interests,
minimum wages, supervision of agricultural production, and the
right of labor unions to organize and bargain collectively. This
all amounted to a radical change from the original ideas of
European Liberals on the role of government.
Despite the metamorphosis in the philosophy of liberalism since
the mid-19th century, almost all modern liberals agree that their

11. common objective is enlargement of the individual's opportunity
to realize full potentialities. This has become a hallmark of
liberalism today. This is an idea consonant with the ideas of
John Rawls.
Rawl’s Theory of Justice: Outline
The most widely discussed theory of
distributive justice
in the past three decades has been that proposed by John Rawls
in his seminal work,
A Theory of Justice.
(Rawls 1971) Rawls proposes the following two principles of
justice:
(1) Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive
total system of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar
system of liberty for all.
(2) Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that
they are both:
(a) to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged, consistent
with the just savings principle, and
(b) attached to offices and positions open to all under
conditions of fair equality of opportunity.
Rawls’ ideas are quite supportive of the notion of a welfare
state. Why is it that people are thought to have a right to what
they have not worked to earn for themselves? Why is it that
there is a law hat requires those who do work to provide for
those who do not work or are unable to work? We find the
answers to those questions in the works of those who defend the
welfare state.

12. Argument in favor of
WELFARE STATE
by
Robert E. Goodin in
Reasons for Welfare:The Political Theory of the Welfare State
Robert Goodin passionately and cogently defends the welfare
state from current attacks by the New Right. But he contends
that the welfare state finds false friends in those on the Old Left
who would justify it as a hesitant first step toward some larger,
ideally just form of society. Reasons for Welfare, in contrast,
offers a defense of the minimal welfare state substantially
independent of any such broader commitments, and at the same
time better able to withstand challenges from the New Right's
moralistic political economy. This defense of the existence of
the welfare state is discussed, flanked by criticism of Old Left
and New Right arguments that is both acute and devastating.
In the author's view, those possessing discretionary control over
resources that they require best justify the welfare state as a
device for protecting needy--and hence vulnerable--members of
society against the risk of exploitation. Its task is to protect the
interests of those not in a position to protect themselves.
Communitarian or egalitarian ideals may lead us to move
beyond the welfare state as thus conceived and justified.
Moving beyond it, however, does not invalidate the arguments
for constantly maintaining at least the minimal protections
necessary for vulnerable members of society. There exists
Special Obligations that are voluntary and Strong Obligations,
such as with family, that are non-voluntary. These Strong
Obligations are based upon vulnerabilities of others. Family and
others assist the vulnerable through voluntary charity, however,
STATE (WELFARE) as “backup to the backup” assists the

13. vulnerable and in this manner the vulnerable are dependent on
the STATE. Therefore it is possible to vest that vulnerable
person with legal ENTITLEMENT to assistance.
Materials on Contemporary Welfare States
Today we appear to have reversed associations with many of the
ideas originally associated with the terms “liberal” and
“conservative”.
LIBERAL
CONSERVATIVE
Individual Freedom
Social Order Preservation
No Government Interference
Governmental Action
No Taxes
Taxes
Laissez-Faire
Governmental Restrictions
Individuals are rational and prudent
Individuals are in need of assistance-imprudent, incapacitated,
victimized
Individuals are self interested

14. Social Welfae is primary interest
These ideas are now associated with the groups that are bearing
the opposite titles so that, for example, liberals are arguing for
more government restrictions and provisions and the taxes to
support those programs which protect people from themselves
and from others.