Andrew Mason
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- May 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199264414
- eISBN:
- 9780191718489
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199264414.003.0006
- Subject:
- Political Science, Democratization
This chapter argues that particular versions of the mitigation approach may also incorporate ‘quasi-egalitarian principles’ — principles which hold that certain kinds or degrees of inequality are ...
More
This chapter argues that particular versions of the mitigation approach may also incorporate ‘quasi-egalitarian principles’ — principles which hold that certain kinds or degrees of inequality are objectionable. It is also maintained here that a defensible version of the mitigation approach might incorporate more than one kind of principle — it need not consist entirely of quasi-egalitarian principles, nor need it be exhausted by a prioritarian or sufficiency principle — and, furthermore, that different kinds of principles might be appropriate for different goods or different aspects of people's circumstances.Less
This chapter argues that particular versions of the mitigation approach may also incorporate ‘quasi-egalitarian principles’ — principles which hold that certain kinds or degrees of inequality are objectionable. It is also maintained here that a defensible version of the mitigation approach might incorporate more than one kind of principle — it need not consist entirely of quasi-egalitarian principles, nor need it be exhausted by a prioritarian or sufficiency principle — and, furthermore, that different kinds of principles might be appropriate for different goods or different aspects of people's circumstances.
Andrew Mason
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- May 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199264414
- eISBN:
- 9780191718489
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199264414.003.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, Democratization
This introductory chapter begins with a discussion of equality of opportunity. It then considers the relationship between equality of opportunity and egalitarian principles. An overview of the ...
More
This introductory chapter begins with a discussion of equality of opportunity. It then considers the relationship between equality of opportunity and egalitarian principles. An overview of the chapters included in this volume is presented.Less
This introductory chapter begins with a discussion of equality of opportunity. It then considers the relationship between equality of opportunity and egalitarian principles. An overview of the chapters included in this volume is presented.
Michael Foley
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- January 2008
- ISBN:
- 9780199232673
- eISBN:
- 9780191716362
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199232673.003.0007
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics
This chapter discusses the egalitarian principle in American society. It presents three outlooks on equality: equality as given, equality as process, and equality in the breach. It then considers the ...
More
This chapter discusses the egalitarian principle in American society. It presents three outlooks on equality: equality as given, equality as process, and equality in the breach. It then considers the ‘racial problem’ involving Black Americans, the feminist challenge to equality, and barriers to complete social equality.Less
This chapter discusses the egalitarian principle in American society. It presents three outlooks on equality: equality as given, equality as process, and equality in the breach. It then considers the ‘racial problem’ involving Black Americans, the feminist challenge to equality, and barriers to complete social equality.
William L. Miller, Annis May Timpson, and Michael Lessnoff
- Published in print:
- 1996
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780198279846
- eISBN:
- 9780191684302
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198279846.003.0003
- Subject:
- Political Science, UK Politics
How do the views of politicians compare with those of the people? To answer this question a sample of 1,244 politicians were interviewed simultaneously with the survey of the public, asking them all ...
More
How do the views of politicians compare with those of the people? To answer this question a sample of 1,244 politicians were interviewed simultaneously with the survey of the public, asking them all the questions put to the public plus a few extra questions about their role and experience in politics. Researchers set out to interview the leader of each political group on each local government council throughout Britain-including the leaders of Independent groups as well as those who led Conservative, Labour, Liberal, Nationalist, and other party groups. Some findings significantly strengthened the conclusions of the earliest US studies of democratic elitism, because they reveal differences between politicians and the public even on questions of principle. On principles of respect for authority and traditional values, wealth creation, tolerance, limited government, free speech, and self-reliance, politicians were substantially more liberal than the public — though on egalitarian principles politicians hardly differed from the public. Other findings seriously undermine the theory of democratic elitism. In particular, it was found that politicians were significantly less liberal than the public on the principles of protest and rebellion — and that reverses the conclusions of those early US studies.Less
How do the views of politicians compare with those of the people? To answer this question a sample of 1,244 politicians were interviewed simultaneously with the survey of the public, asking them all the questions put to the public plus a few extra questions about their role and experience in politics. Researchers set out to interview the leader of each political group on each local government council throughout Britain-including the leaders of Independent groups as well as those who led Conservative, Labour, Liberal, Nationalist, and other party groups. Some findings significantly strengthened the conclusions of the earliest US studies of democratic elitism, because they reveal differences between politicians and the public even on questions of principle. On principles of respect for authority and traditional values, wealth creation, tolerance, limited government, free speech, and self-reliance, politicians were substantially more liberal than the public — though on egalitarian principles politicians hardly differed from the public. Other findings seriously undermine the theory of democratic elitism. In particular, it was found that politicians were significantly less liberal than the public on the principles of protest and rebellion — and that reverses the conclusions of those early US studies.
Kristin Shrader-Frechette
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- January 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199794638
- eISBN:
- 9780199919277
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199794638.003.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy
Chapter 1 begins by stressing the severity of climate change (CC) and showing how, contrary to popular belief, atomic energy is not a viable solution to ...
More
Chapter 1 begins by stressing the severity of climate change (CC) and showing how, contrary to popular belief, atomic energy is not a viable solution to CC. Many scientists and most market proponents agree that renewable energy and energy efficiencies are better options. The chapter also shows that government subsidies for oil and nuclear power are the result of flawed science, poor ethics, short-term thinking, and special-interest influence. The chapter has 7 sections, the first of which surveys four major components of the energy crisis. These are oil addiction, non-CC-related deaths from fossil-fuel pollution, nuclear-weapons proliferation, and catastrophic CC. The second section summarizes some of the powerful evidence for global CC. The third section uses historical, ahistorical, Rawlsian, and utilitarian ethical principles to show how developed nations, especially the US, are most responsible for human-caused CC. The fourth section shows why climate-change skeptics, such as “deniers” who doubt CC is real, and “delayers” who say that it should not yet be addressed, have no valid objections. Instead, they all err scientifically and ethically. The fifth section illustrates that all modern scientific methods—and scientific consensus since at least 1995—confirm the reality of global CC. Essentially all expert-scientific analyses published in refereed, scientific-professional journals confirm the reality of global CC. The sixth section of the chapter shows how fossil-fuel special interests have contributed to the continued CC debate largely by paying non-experts to deny or challenge CC. The seventh section of the chapter provides an outline of each chapter in the book, noting that this book makes use of both scientific and ethical analyses to show why nuclear proponents’ arguments err, why CC deniers are wrong, and how scientific-methodological understanding can advance sound energy policy—including conservation, renewable energy, and energy efficiencies.Less
Chapter 1 begins by stressing the severity of climate change (CC) and showing how, contrary to popular belief, atomic energy is not a viable solution to CC. Many scientists and most market proponents agree that renewable energy and energy efficiencies are better options. The chapter also shows that government subsidies for oil and nuclear power are the result of flawed science, poor ethics, short-term thinking, and special-interest influence. The chapter has 7 sections, the first of which surveys four major components of the energy crisis. These are oil addiction, non-CC-related deaths from fossil-fuel pollution, nuclear-weapons proliferation, and catastrophic CC. The second section summarizes some of the powerful evidence for global CC. The third section uses historical, ahistorical, Rawlsian, and utilitarian ethical principles to show how developed nations, especially the US, are most responsible for human-caused CC. The fourth section shows why climate-change skeptics, such as “deniers” who doubt CC is real, and “delayers” who say that it should not yet be addressed, have no valid objections. Instead, they all err scientifically and ethically. The fifth section illustrates that all modern scientific methods—and scientific consensus since at least 1995—confirm the reality of global CC. Essentially all expert-scientific analyses published in refereed, scientific-professional journals confirm the reality of global CC. The sixth section of the chapter shows how fossil-fuel special interests have contributed to the continued CC debate largely by paying non-experts to deny or challenge CC. The seventh section of the chapter provides an outline of each chapter in the book, noting that this book makes use of both scientific and ethical analyses to show why nuclear proponents’ arguments err, why CC deniers are wrong, and how scientific-methodological understanding can advance sound energy policy—including conservation, renewable energy, and energy efficiencies.
