IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/utilit/v27y2015i04p470-486_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fairness, Benefiting by Lottery and the Chancy Satisfaction of Moral Claims

Author

Listed:
  • VONG, GERARD

Abstract

This article offers a new theory about how using lotteries to distribute scarce benefits satisfies beneficiaries' claims. In the first section of the article I criticize John Broome's view and on the basis of these criticisms set out four desiderata for a philosophically adequate account of claim satisfaction by lottery. In section II I propose and defend a new view called the dual structure view, so called because it posits that claimants have two types of claims in the relevant scarce benefit distribution cases under discussion. This view meets all the desiderata set out in section I. Section III draws out the practical implications of my view for a variety of temporally extended cases, including the distribution of corneas to patients who have suffered corneal degeneration.

Suggested Citation

  • Vong, Gerard, 2015. "Fairness, Benefiting by Lottery and the Chancy Satisfaction of Moral Claims," Utilitas, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(4), pages 470-486, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:utilit:v:27:y:2015:i:04:p:470-486_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0953820815000357/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stefan Wintein & Conrad Heilmann, 2018. "Dividing the indivisible," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 17(1), pages 51-74, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:utilit:v:27:y:2015:i:04:p:470-486_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/uti .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.