Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Pluralism, Justice, and Equality$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

David Miller and Michael Walzer

Print publication date: 1995

Print ISBN-13: 9780198280088

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: November 2003

DOI: 10.1093/0198280084.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 22 November 2019

Against ‘Complex’ Equality

Against ‘Complex’ Equality

Chapter:
(p.226) 10 Against ‘Complex’ Equality
Source:
Pluralism, Justice, and Equality
Author(s):

Richard J. Arneson (Contributor Webpage)

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/0198280084.003.0011

Richard Arneson argues that Michael Walzer's theory of complex equality is not sufficiently egalitarian, as it permits any degree of inequality. Arneson claims that David Miller's reinterpretation of the notion of complex equality as social equality does not succeed in replacing the ideal of distributive equality.

Keywords:   complex equality, distributive equality, egalitarianism, inequality, David Miller, social equality, Michael Walzer

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .