Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2002

Publication Title

Journal of Social Philosophy

Volume

33

Issue

1

First Page

131

Last Page

143

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9833.00128

Abstract

This paper proceeds as follows. First, I present the standard interpretation of Rawls’s account of desert. I then show how this interpretation is inadequate, bringing to light certain subtleties of the account that give it entirely new meaning. Next, I examine the criticisms of Nozick and Sher and show how, due to misconceptions of Rawls’s account of desert, they fail. Finally, I offer a criticism of Rawls’s theory of justice based on the correct interpretation of his account of desert.

Download

Share

COinS