Wealth, Well-Being, and the Danger of Having Too Much

Bibliographic Data

ID3151653
AuthorsDustin Crummett (0000-0003-1508-1184, University of Notre Dame, corresponding author)
Year2017
Volume8
Issue5
Pages86
Publication date2017-05-08
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueReligions (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2077-1444 • E-ISSN: 2077-1444
PublisherMDPI AG (PUBLISHER • IT)
DOI10.3390/rel8050086
OpenAlexW2613635729
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited27

It is impossible for an agent who is classically economically rational to have so much wealth that it is harmful for them, since such an agent would simply give away their excess wealth. Actual agents, vulnerable to akrasia and lacking full information, are not economically rational, but economists, ethicists and political philosophers have nonetheless mostly ignored the possibility that having too much might be harmful in some ways. I survey the major philosophical theories of well-being and draw on ethics and the social sciences to point out several ways in which, on the most plausible of these theories, having too much, relative to other members of one's society, might be harmful to oneself (for instance, by making it harder for one to have appropriate relationships with others, or by making it more likely than one will develop undesirable character traits). I argue that because egalitarian policies prevent these harms and provide the advantaged with other benefits (such as access to public goods which help rich and poor alike), egalitarian policies are not as harmful to the rich as is commonly supposed, and may even be helpful to them on balance. I close by discussing the practical implications of this

Economics · Epistemology · Law and economics · Political science · Politics · Positive economics · Law · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics · Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction · Psychology

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access