Prioritarianism, Levelling Down and Welfare Diffusion

Ethic Theory Moral Prac (2011) 14:307311

DOI 10.1007/s10677-010-9242-y

Ingmar Persson

Accepted: 19 July 2010 /Published online: 6 August 2010 # Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Abstract I have earlier argued that, like egalitarianism, prioritarianism is exposed to the levelling down objectionwhich I do not find seriousbut also that it faces related, more serious objections that egalitarianism avoids. In this paper I reply to Thomas Porters attempt to rebut this argument. I also trace the more serious objections to prioritarianism to the fact that it implies the desirability of welfare diffusion, i.e. that it is better all things considered if a quantity of welfare is distributed over as many recipients as possible, so that each recipient gets a minimal benefit, and that the outcome would still be in one respect better, even if the quantity of welfare was reduced. In contrast to egalitarianism, prioritarianism therefore implies that it is in one respect better if an equality, or a solitary individual, is located at lower rather than a higher level of welfare.

Keywords Egalitarianism . Levelling down objection . Parfit . Porter . Prioritarianism

Derek Parfit has famously contended that egalitarianism is exposed to a levelling down objection (1995: 17). It is to the effect that egalitarianism implies, implausibly, that a change, which consists in nothing but the welfare level of the better-off sinking towards the level of the worse-off, is in one respect better, though it is better for nobody (and worse for some). It is better in that there is less inequality, and on (teleological) egalitarianism (unjust) inequality is bad in itself.1

Parfit maintains that in contrast to egalitarianism, the priority view or prioritarianism, the view that it is morally more important to benefit the people who are worse off (1995: 22), escapes this objection. However, this formulation makes prioritarianism sound like a deontological view that claims that acts of benefiting the worse-off have greater moral

1According to Parfit (1995: 9), deontological egalitarianism is concerned only with inequalities that involve wrong-doing, whereas teleological egalitarianism also covers natural inequalities. This is rough, but it will do for present purposes.

I. Persson (*)

Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and the Theory of Science, University of Gothenburg, Box 200, 40530 Gothenburg, Swedene-mail: [email protected]: [email protected]

Prioritarianism, Levelling Down and Welfare...