Justice As Desert: Is There Any Such Thing?
ABSTRACT: Philosopher Matthew Lipman, in Social Inquiry, says that there are instances in which 'what one deserves may be specified fairly readily. A sick child deserves medicine, a hungry child deserves food, children deserve an education...' This seems to imply that these are cases in which what one deserves is clear-cut, and only when 'the cases become more complicated' does it become 'progressively more difficult' to determine desert. I would submit that these cases are not nearly so cut-and-dry, in terms of determining desert, as one might imagine. Is it really correct to say that a sick child deserves medicine? Who is to say? Who is to be the ultimate arbiter? Is there some sort of authority or power (higher or otherwise) who is looked to in order to make such a determination (or who is looked to in order to justify making such an assertion in the first place)? Is desert to be determined based on need? On abundance of what is deserved? On legal entitlements? This paper will address just such questions.
Philosopher Matthew Lipman, in Social Inquiry, says that there are instances in which "what one deserves may be specified fairly readily. A sick child deserves medicine, a hungry child deserves food, children deserve an education...." (1) This seems to imply that these are cases in which what one deserves is clear-cut, and only when "the cases become more complicated" does it become "progressively more difficult" to determine desert. (2)
I would reply: not so fast. These aforementioned cases, I submit, are not nearly so cut-and-dried, in terms of determining desert, as one might imagine. Is it really correct to say that a sick child deserves medicine? Who is to say? Who is to be the ultimate arbiter? Is there some sort of authority or power (higher or otherwise) who is looked to in order to make such a determination (or who is looked to in order to justify making such an assertion in the first place)?
Certainly, a sick child usually needs certain medication in order to get better. Moreover, in a society in which such medication is plentiful, legislators may be prompted to enact a law that stipulates that all sick children are entitled legally to such medication.
But do they deserve such medication, just because they need it or the medication is abundant or they are legally entitled to it?
...he city and has suffered as a result of losing so much of its tax base to the 1967 riots. The event should be used as a cautionary tale to other cities in transition to be cognizant of demographic changes and represent all of your citizens living within your city.
In Peter Singer’s “Famine, Affluence and Morality,” Singer makes three claims about moral duty; that avoidable suffering is bad, that it is our moral obligation to help others in need, and that we should help those in suffering regardless of their distance to us or if others are in the same position as we are to help. First, I will elaborate on Singer’s arguments for each of these positions. Next, I will discuss two objections to Singer’s position, one that he debates in his writings and another that I examine on my own, and Singer’s responses to those objections. Then I will examine why Singer’s rebuttals to the objections were successful.
Newark began to deteriorate and the white residents blamed the rising African-American population for Newark's downfall. However, one of the real culprits of this decline in Newark was do to poor housing, lack of employment, and discrimination. Twenty-five percent of the cities housing was substandard according to the Model C...
This paper explores Peter Singer’s argument, in Famine, Affluence, and Morality, that we have morally required obligations to those in need. The explanation of his argument and conclusion, if accepted, would dictate changes to our lifestyle as well as our conceptions of duty and charity, and would be particularly demanding of the affluent. In response to the central case presented by Singer, John Kekes offers his version, which he labels the and points out some objections. Revisions of the principle provide some response to the objections, but raise additional problems. Yet, in the end, the revisions provide support for Singer’s basic argument that, in some way, we ought to help those in need.
Prostate cancer has been the number one diagnosed cancer today. According to the World Health Organization, approximately one in every ten American men will develop prostate cancer during his lifespan. This cancer has been very common in the last few years. American Cancer Society reported over 200,000 new cases of prostate cancer. Huge number of population suffered severely. The prostate is significant for reproduction. It helps the substances that are involved in fertilization and transporting of sperm as well as survival. Prostate tumor is developed in the prostate gland, which is found in the men’s reproductive system. Prostate is the size of a walnut, which is located inferiorly in the penis and anterior to the rectum. It contains the connective tissue, which includes the glandular and fibrous tissues. This tumor starts to develop during their adolescent year due to the control of the male reproductive hormones. When the tumor starts to develop, it begins at the urethra, which is a tube that releases the urine from the bladder. The tumor is a slow development yet it is contagious to the other parts of the body, such as it does affect the pelvic bones, lungs, liver, and the lower vertebrae (Zenka, 2009).
There are many treatments today for prostate cancer, and many more potential cures. However, today, there is nothing that can be done to permanently remove the cancer. All that can be done now is slow down the process. Hopefully, in the future with all the medical advances, someone will be able to find a cure to help the thousands of men that suffer and die each year from this terrible disease.
The term enlightenment means ‘the action of enlightening or the state of being enlightened.’ The Enlightenment or the Age of reason was a movement in the 17th and 18th centuries which began in France. This time was mostly influenced by philosophers. People were starting to use reasoning to understand and explain their surroundings.
The ideal society we would all be considered equal, but reality often defies this idealism. When we think of police officers, we think of people working hard to keep us all safe, but this may not always be the case in today 's society. This is demonstrated in an opinion piece published in the Miami Herald, entitled “Need a ‘big, bad dude’? White criminals need not apply” by Leonard Pitts Jr. The article opens by discussing the shooting of African-American man Terence Crutcher, where the police officer who shot him stated it was due to him not obeying her orders and reaching inside his SUV for a weapon. However, the video of the shooting shows that this did not happen. The article also goes on to discuss other African-Americans shot in recent
What is Porter Diamond Model? It was known as a Diamond Model by anyone or public. The diamond model is one of the economic model developed by Porter's in 1990 in his own entitled. 'The Competitive Advantage' of Nation's, where he published herself on his theory. The theory was founded by Michael Porter's that has been used by certain industries only, where it will be more competitive in some specific location. The theory by Michael Porter is why the particular industries become a more competitive in some particular locations. This theory is also very effective in providing healthy competition among the industry right now. This theory also prepared personally by Porter's. It is very important for some industries which they know will be deepened and become more competitive in these locations. This theory plays an important role in criticizing or become one way for the industry to grow their businesses in certain locations. In addition, the diamond model helps to understand the comparison between the position of some countries of the industry in global competition that is very rapid.
In this paper, I will examine Nozick’s ‘whatever arises from a just situation by just steps is itself just’ formula. By this formula, Nozick protects individuals’ absolute property rights. To examine its validity, first, I will show that Nozick’s entitlement theory relies on Kantian principle, which demands treating everyone as persons having individual rights with dignity. However, it will be clear that Kantian theory does not necessarily yield the concept of absolute property rights. Second, I will explain the principle of self-ownership, which will clarify that persons have rights over their bodies and powers. I will find the principle of self-ownership is compatible with Kantian principle. Third, I will examine Nozick’s proviso, which guides legitimate initial acquisition. However, finally, I will show that the appropriation that passes Nozick’s proviso violates the idea of respecting people as persons with dignity. In other words, Nozick’s proviso is inconsistent with Kantian principle. Therefore, Nozick’s formula fails.
In “An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness”, Chinua Achebe says that “it is the desire¬—one might indeed say the need—in Western psychology to set Africa up as a foil to Europe” (337). Indeed it is wise for Achebe to make this claim while discussing Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, a short novel that presents the relationship between Europe and Africa as an entirely one-sided narrative which denies the African people their right to personage. For a majority of the novel, Marlow’s narration of a story goes so above and beyond telling one narrative, that it works toward preventing the African people from developing a voice of their own. Edward Said, in Culture and Imperialism, provides perhaps the most efficient explanation as to how the narrative that Marlow tells in the novel works against the African people:
Of course I looked “justice” up in the dictionary before I started to write this paper and I didn’t find anything of interest except of course a common word in every definition, that being “fair”. This implies that justice would have something to do with being fair. I thought that if one of the things the law and legal system are about is maintaining and promoting justice and a sense of “fairness”, they might not be doing such a spiffy job. An eye for an eye is fair? No, that would be too easy, too black and white. I could cite several examples where I thought a judge’s or jury’s ruling was not fair, but I won’t because frankly, we’ve all seen those.
one of the uniform’s function, maintain students as equal for the teachers, and that way
Prostate cancer is the commonest cause of death among men each year as far as cancer goes. If women have breast cancer all the time, men have prostate cancer to treat. You should always think about prevention rather than cure when it comes to cancer. It's actually a psychological problem, because men tend not to consult their physician for fear reasons. All prostate cancer sufferers should ask themselves what they like to have a slightest suspicion or any other form of prostate cancer warning signs, such as cancer treatment may Having started on time. It is a complex disease that hit the top mark among type of cancer in the United States. It is a problem that is very common among the age group of 50 or more, and men must be very careful with any symptoms or less proximity to the symptoms of prostate cancer.
students to wear uniforms or not. I have weighed the pros-and-cons, and although I can see a few drawbacks, ultimately, I support the idea. While I’ve considered the notion that uniforms may restrict our student’s individuality, undermine the whole “free education” idea, and might also be viewed as a band-aid solution to a few of the larger concerns our public schools face, however I strongly maintain that there are far more advantages than disadvantages. The U.S. Departments of Education’s Manual on School Uniforms states “Uniforms by themselves cannot solve all of the problems of school discipline, but they can be one positive contributing factor