Welfare and the images of charity

Philosophical Quarterly

Volumn 36, Issue 145, 1986, Pages 463-482

  Waldron, Jeremy ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84963068531     PISSN: 00318094     EISSN: 14679213     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/2219874     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. There is a useful discussion of the complexity of Nietzsche’s hostility to altruism in W. Kaufman, Nietzsche: Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist, 4th Edition (Princeton, N.J., 1974), pp. 363-78.
2. Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged (New York, 1957), pp. 680-706.
3. Cf. the tide of Rand’s collection of essays - The Virtue of Selfishness. Her argument for egoism is criticized at length by Robert Nozick in his paper, ‘On the Randian Argument’ in J. Paul (ed.) Reading Nozick: Essays on Anarchy, State and Utopia’ (Oxford, 1981), p. 206.
4. Murray Rothbard, Power and Markets, pp. 187 and 164. Milton and Rose Friedman, Free to Choose (1980), p. 120.
5. Hannah Arendt, On Revolution (Harmondsworth, 1973), ch. 2. The enormous difficulty of sorting out one’s own motive, let alone that of anyone else, is emphasised by Kant in the Groundwork: see Immanuel Kant, The Moral Law, ed. H. J. Paton (London, 1961), pp. 74-5 (IV, 407 of the Prussian Academy edition).
6. Kant, op. cit., pp. 90-1 (IV, 423).
7. Immanuel Kant, The Metaphysical Elements of Justice, trans. J. Ladd (Indianapolis, 1965), pp. 18-34 (VI, 218-30 of the Prussian Academy Edition). For Kant’s own political account of welfare provision, see ibid., pp. 92-5 (IV, 325-8).
8. This is particularly noticeable in Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State and Utopia (Oxford, 1974), pp. 32-3; John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Oxford, 1971), pp. 251 ff.; and Michael Sandcl, Liberalism and the Limits of Justice (Cambridge, 1982), passim.
9. ‘“Nozick, op. cit., pp. 171-3.
10. See, especially, ibid., pp. 265-8.
11. Ibid., p. 238.
12. Kant, Metaphysical Elements of Justice, op. cit., pp. 35-7 (VI, 231-3).
13. Ted Honderich, Violence far Equality (Harmondsworth, 1980), ch. 2.
14. For the best modern discussion, see Thomas Nagel, “The Limits of Objectivity” in S. McMurrin (ed.) The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, vol. I (Salt Lake City and Cambridge, 1980), pp. 119-39.
15. Luke 10: 30-37.
16. In this, I follow the approach taken by John Rawls in “Kantian Constructivism and Moral Theory” (the John Dewey Lectures), Journal of Philosophy, 77 (1980), p. 546.
17. According to F. A. Hayek, Law, Legislation and Liberty, vol. II: The Mirage of Social Justice (London, 1976), ch. 9, this is the only basis on which any inequality can be described as unjust.
18. Karl Marx, Capital, vol. I (Harmondsworth, 1976), cc. 27-9.
19. C.F. I. Berlin, Four Essays on Liberty (Oxford, 1969), pp. 122-3.
20. C.F. Raymond Plant, Equality, Markets and the State, Fabian Tract 494 (London, 1984), p.
21. For the common law rule, see R v Dudley and Stephens (1884), 14 Q.B.D. 273, and Southwark L.B.C. v Williams (1971) Ch. 734, at 744.
22. See note 13, p. 468 above.
23. Kant, Metaphysical Elements of Justice, op. cit., pp. 51-64 (VI, 245-6).
24. For a similar principle in the foundations of liberal theory, see John Locke, Two Treatises of Government, ed. Peter Laslett (Cambridge, 1960), II, section 42.
25. C.F. Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, ed. C. B. Macpherson (Harmondsworth, 1968) Chapter 14; and also Locke, op. cit., II, section 6: “Every one as he is bound to preserve himself, and not to quit his Station wilfully; so by the like reason when his own Preservation comes not in competition, ought he, as much as he can, to preserve the rest of Mankind. ” (my emphasis).
26. C.F. Rawls, “Kantian Constructivism”, op. cit., p. 538.
27. Cf. Immanuel Kant, “Theory and Practice” in H. Reiss (ed.) Kant’s Political Writings (Cambridge, 1970), p. 79: “For if the law is such that a whole people could not possibly agree to it., it is unjust;. ”
28. Hobbes, op. cit., pp. 192 and 268-70 Locke, op. cit., II, section 135. (See also section 138.)
29. Rawls, Theory of Justice, op. cit., pp. 175-6.
30. Cf. my discussion of the distribution of goods after the owner’s death, in J. Waldron, “Locke’s Account of Inheritance and Bequest”, Journal of the History of Philosophy, 19 (1981), p. 48.
31. Cf. Rawls, Theory of Justice, op. cit., pp. 240-3, and “Kantian Constructivism”, op. cit., p. 538.
32. Cf. Rawls, “Kantian Constructivism”, op. cit., p. 546.
33. Rawls is more optimistic about the possibility of extending contractarian ideas to cover relations between states: see Theory of Justice, op. cit., pp. 377 ff.