Egalitarianism is a principle that propounds the idea that all human beings are equal and, therefore, deserve equal opportunities. Many, the doctrine has been criticized, birthing other concepts such as the principle of “luck egalitarianism.” Luck egalitarianism supports responsibility-sensitive justice. It looks into the reasons for social differences. It bases its argument that the result of an individual's lifestyle may or may not be due to their choices. It holds that personal responsibility and choice should be the primary determinant for social distribution. In cases where one's lifestyle results from his/her choices, then the person deserves to bear the benefits and burdens of that choice by his/herself. Society does not owe them compensation. However, if it is not a result of their choice, it should not be a reason for injustice. The individual deserves compensation from society. Luck egalitarianism prioritizes the need of those who suffer through no fault of their own.
Kant's ideas support the opinions raised in luck egalitarianism. Kant believed in deontological ethics. Deontological ethics hold that people must act accordingly despite the consequences of their actions. It separates the wrong ones' proper actions, and it does not give room for people to justify a wrong by the results. If we have to act out of a sense of duty, then we enforce responsibility-sensitive justice. For instance, to be healthy, one needs to look after themselves. The deontological perspective requires that they take care of themselves. Taking responsibility puts all individuals on an equal pedestal. And society will not have to be forced into performing unjust compensations. Kant’s ethics urges individuals to make the right choices. Kant deontologists abstain from an action when it does not respect human beings and do not wish to make it universal.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
