This article is concerned to eliminate a number of possible confusions in egalitarian thought.I begin by showing that the most plausible forms of egalitarianism do not fit straightforwardly on either side of the distinction between Telic and Deontic egalitarianism.I go on to argue that the question of the scope of egalitarian distributive principles cannot be answered in the abstract, but instead depends on giving a prior account of the different ways in which distributive inequality can be bad.I then discuss some misconceptions about the "Levelling Down Objection," and about the relationship between egalitarianism and prioritarianism.In doing so, my aim is to present a more plausible account of what egalitarians should believe.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 335 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.