Egalitarian Critiques of Health Inequalities
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 23204591 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Daniel M Hausman (0000-0003-0249-3518, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2013 |
| Pages | 95-112 |
| Publication date | 2013-10-18 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | CHAPTER |
| Venue | Inequalities in Health (SOURCE_BOOK) |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199931392.003.0008 |
| OpenAlex | W2491623575 |
| ISBN | 9780199931392 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 6 |
This essay begins by offering a general argument that health inequalities are not themselves typically injustices and that, with the exception of incompensable health conditions, health inequalities do not imply the overall inequalities that raise questions of justice. It then turns to detailed criticisms of two arguments for the contrary thesis that health inequalities are prima facie unjust: Shlomi Segall’s recent luck egalitarian account and Norman Daniels’s better known relational egalitarian case.
Argument (complex analysis) · Economic Justice · Economics · Epistemology · Inequality · Law and economics · Luck · Political science · Positive economics · Prima facie · Sociology · Ethics in medical practice · Law · Mathematics · Medicine · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics
| Unique citing works | 6 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,55 |
| Citation span | 2015 - 2026 (12) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 6 |