Distributive Justice and Evolution. Towards a Science of Equality


Abstract


The paper offers reasons why distributive justice scholars should be interested in evolutionary science: it can help us understand, for example, the genetic and subsistence factors influencing our judgements about fair distributions, where our sense of property may come from, why freedom matters to certain creatures, and why we have fraternal and egalitarian sentiments and unequal societies.


Keywords


debunking explanations; freedom; equality; fraternity; property

References


  • Boehm, C., 1999. Hierarchy in the Forest. The Evolution of Egalitarian Behavior. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts.

  • Bowles, S. and H. Gintis, 2011. A Cooperative Species. Princeton University Press. Princeton/Oxford.

  • Brosnan, S., 2011. «Property in Non Human Primates». New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 132: 9-22. DOI: <10.1002/cd.293>.

  • Cancian, F., 1966. «Maximization as Norm, Strategy and Theory. A Comment on Programmatic Statements in Economic Anthropology». American Anthropologist, 68: 465-470. DOI: <10.1525/aa.1966.68.2.02a00110>.

  • Casal, P., 2011. «Love Not War. On the Chemistry of Good and Evil». In Gosseries A. and Y. Vanderborght (eds.), 2011. Arguing About Justice. Essays for Philippe Van Parijs. Louvain University Press. Louvain-la-Neuve.

  • Cochrane, A., 2012. Animal Rights without Liberation. Columbia University Press. New York.

  • De Waal, F., 2009. The Age of Empathy. Harmony. New York.

  • Hauser, M., 2007. Moral Minds. Harper Collins. New York.

  • Henrich, J. et al., 2005. «“Economic Man” in Cross-cultural Perspective: Behavioral Experiments in 15 Small-scale Societies». Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 28: 795-855. DOI: <10.1017/S0140525X05000142>.

  • Henrich, J.; Boyd, R. and P. Richerson, 2012. «The Puzzle of Monogamous Marriage». Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Science, 367: 657-669. DOI: <10.1098/rstb.2011.0290>.

  • Jensen, K.; Call, J. and M. Tomasello, 2007. «Chimpanzees Are Rational Maximisers in an Ultimatum Game». Science, 318: 107-109. DOI: <10.1126/science.1145850>.

  • Maynard-Smith, J. and G. A. Parker, 1976. «The Logic of Asymmetric Contests». Animal Behaviour, 24: 159-175. DOI: <10.1016/S0003-3472(76)80110-8>.

  • Milanovic, B., 2011. The Haves and the Have-Nots: A Brief and Idiosyncratic History of Global Inequality. Basic Books. New York.

  • Proctor, D. et al., 2013. «Chimpanzees Play the Ultimatum Game». PNAS, 110, 2070-2075. DOI: <10.1073/pnas.1220806110>.

  • Rousseau, J., 2002. The Social Contract and the First and Second Discourses. Yale University Press. New Haven.

  • Stake, J. A., 2004. «The Property “Instinct”». Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 359(1451): 1763-1774. DOI: <10.1098/rstb.2004.1551>.

  • Stewart, S. and A. G. Thomas, 2013. «The Ape That Thought It Was a Peacock. Does Evolutionary Psychology Exaggerate Human Sex Differences?». Psychological Inquiry, 24(3): 137-168. DOI: <10.1080/1047840X.2013.804899>.

  • Wallace, B.; Cesarini, D.; Lichtenstein, P. and M. Johannesson, 2007. «Heritability of Ultimatum Game Respondent Behaviour». PNAS, 104(40): 15631-15634. DOI: <10.1073/pnas.0706642104>.

  • Wilkinson, R. and K. Pickett, 2010. The Spirit Level. Why Equality is Better for Everyone. Penguin. London.

  • Zerjal, T. et al., 2003. «The Genetic Legacy of the Mongols». American Journal of Human Genetics, 72: 717-721. DOI: <10.1086/367774>.







Creative Commons License
Texts in the journal are –unless otherwise indicated– published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________