The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Rescuing Justice and Equality
Abstract
In this work of political philosophy, Cohen sets out to rescue the egalitarian thesis that in a society where distributive justice prevails, people’s material prospects are roughly equal. Arguing against the Rawlsian version of a just society, Cohen demonstrates that distributive justice does not tolerate deep inequality.
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.
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
Is There a Distinctively Political Normativity?
Leader Maynard, J., & Worsnip, A. (2018) · Ethics · doi:10.1086/697449 · Cited by 179
Can Brain Drain Justify Immigration Restrictions?
Oberman, K. (2013) · Ethics · doi:10.1086/669567 · Cited by 129
Schmidtz, D. (2016) · Social Philosophy and Policy · doi:10.1017/s0265052516000406 · Cited by 65
Taking People As They Are: Islam As a “Realistic Utopia” in the Political Theory of Sayyid Qutb
MARCH, A. F. (2010) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s000305541000002x · Cited by 54
Four Conceptions of Equal Opportunity
Arneson, R. (2018) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.1111/ecoj.12531 · Cited by 46
Metadata
- Authors
- Cohen, G. A.
- Venue
- Harvard University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Harvard University Press
- Published
- 2008-01-01
- OpenAlex
- W169219175
- Cited by
- 1,792
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 73.68
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Rescuing Justice and Equality. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4159/9780674029651
- The paper
- Cohen, G. A. (2008). Rescuing Justice and Equality. Harvard University Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674029651
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
