Many argue that an economic market is required for the flourishing of a society and it gives an individual the right to liberty; whereas others argue saying that it is indeed an enemy of equality which widens the disparity between the rich and the poor. Most political philosophers or scholars have tried to find the balance between equality and the liberty served by the market. Dworkin suggests that an economic market is central to the development of any theory of equality of resources. The basis of his theory is the unique concept of an ‘equal auction’ of ‘bundles of resources’ put forth by him. Suppose in the event of a shipwreck, survivors are washed ashore on a desert island with abundant resources that belong to nobody. The survivors come
…show more content…
Once an equal division of resources is done, the next question to be addressed is how can the impact and character of luck be consistent with equality of resources? Dworkin differentiates between two kinds of luck - option luck and brute luck. Option luck is a matter of calculated and deliberate gambles; when one knowingly takes a risk anticipating a certain outcome, the responsibility of the consequence of that gamble lies wholly on that person. Brute luck, on the other hand is in nobody’s control. Outcomes that do not occur due to a deliberately taken risk are considered brute luck. For example, if one buys a stock on the exchange that rises, then his option luck is good; whereas if one gets hit by a truck, his brute luck is bad. Insurance provides a link between option luck and brute luck. Is it consistent with equality of resources that due to these differences in option and brute luck, people should have differing income or wealth? We have already established that one must pay the price of the life he wants, measured in what others give up for one to lead that life. That is the whole point of using equal auction as a device for initial equality of resources. Then, the life that one leads through his own option luck is what he rightly deserves. The price of a safer life is to not gain the prospects of the gambling life, be it positive or negative. Whereas the price of a gambling life is then to accept the prospects, again, be it positive or
Once an equal division of resources is done, the next question to be addressed is how can the impact and character of luck be consistent with equality of resources? Dworkin differentiates between two kinds of luck - option luck and brute luck. Option luck is a matter of calculated and deliberate gambles; when one knowingly takes a risk anticipating a certain outcome, the responsibility of the consequence of that gamble lies wholly on that person. Brute luck, on the other hand is in nobody’s control. Outcomes that do not occur due to a deliberately taken risk are considered brute luck. For example, if one buys a stock on the exchange that rises, then his option luck is good; whereas if one gets hit by a truck, his brute luck is bad. Insurance provides a link between option luck and brute luck. Is it consistent with equality of resources that due to these differences in option and brute luck, people should have differing income or wealth? We have already established that one must pay the price of the life he wants, measured in what others give up for one to lead that life. That is the whole point of using equal auction as a device for initial equality of resources. Then, the life that one leads through his own option luck is what he rightly deserves. The price of a safer life is to not gain the prospects of the gambling life, be it positive or negative. Whereas the price of a gambling life is then to accept the prospects, again, be it positive or