The DOI matches its Crossref record.
What Should Egalitarians Believe?
Open accessAbstract
This article is concerned to eliminate a number of possible confusions in egalitarian thought.I begin by showing that the most plausible forms of egalitarianism do not fit straightforwardly on either side of the distinction between Telic and Deontic egalitarianism.I go on to argue that the question of the scope of egalitarian distributive principles cannot be answered in the abstract, but instead depends on giving a prior account of the different ways in which distributive inequality can be bad.I then discuss some misconceptions about the "Levelling Down Objection," and about the relationship between egalitarianism and prioritarianism.In doing so, my aim is to present a more plausible account of what egalitarians should believe.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“If, as I do, one sees the value of equality as tied in to ideas of equal standing and status, and to a certain ideal of how people might relate to each other, it is not difficult to see how centering the value of equality can give us reason to prefer forms of interaction in which we are participants in shared institutions that themselves affirm our equal status and value, as opposed to forms of”
From Public Provision in Democratic Societies (2024) · cites this paper as O'Neill 2008
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Public Provision in Democratic Societies
O’Neill, M. (2024) · Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics · doi:10.23941/ejpe.v16i2.823 · Cited by 2
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- O'NEILL, M.
- Venue
- Philosophy & Public Affairs
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-03
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 119-156
- ISSN
- 0048-3915 (ISSN-L)
- 1088-4963
- OpenAlex
- W2123038580
- Cited by
- 335
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 17 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 56 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 39 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 12.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Philosophy & Public Affairs (publishedVersion)
- Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- University of Manchester
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Philosophy and Ethics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophical Ethics and Theory
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Income, Poverty, and Inequality
- Keywords
- egalitarianism, distributive justice, distributive inequality, prioritarianism, distributive principles
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: What Should Egalitarians Believe? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1088-4963.2008.00130.x
- The paper
- O'NEILL, M. (2008). What Should Egalitarians Believe? Philosophy & Public Affairs. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1088-4963.2008.00130.x
