Primary goods, capabilities,...or well-being?
By: Louis Kaplow
Contributors: John M. Olin Center for Law, Economics, and Business
Series: Discussion paper -- no. 602; Discussion paper (John M. Olin Center for Law, Economics, and Business : Online) -- no. 602.
Publisher: Harvard Law School
Published: 2007
Place of publication: Cambridge, MA
Language: eng
Format: [electronic resource] /
Description: "Theories of distributive justice and of the aggregate social good typically require a method of assessing each individual's situation.  Among the common measures are primary goods, capabilities, and well-being.  This article advances the argument that approaches that focus on the means of fulfillment, where the means are multi-dimensional, are subject to an objection if advanced as ideal normative theories.  In general, it is possible to raise every individual's well-being by deviating from the dictates of means-based theories.  This result is problematic not only on welfarist grounds but also if freedom, autonomy, or consent is regarded to be important.  It is suggested that means-based theories nevertheless have appeal, but for instrumental, not intrinsic reasons"--John M. Olin Center for Law, Economics, and Business web site.
Notes: Title from PDF file as viewed on 11/20/2007.

Includes bibliographical references.

Also available in print.

System requirements: Adobe Acrobat Reader.

Mode of access: World Wide Web.