Our ethical obligations regarding the distribution of wealth depend on the moral principles accepted. Most theories require economic inequality to be justified, but disagree over whether justice demands equality, welfare, fair institutions, or property rights.
In applied ethics, distributive justice creates personal duties, such as charitable giving, and institutional duties concerning taxation, welfare, education, healthcare, and economic opportunity. The key question is whether a distribution is morally justified, not merely whether inequality exists.
| Ethical approach | Main obligation | Key challenge |
|---|---|---|
| Utilitarianism | Distribute resources to maximize overall happiness or preference satisfaction; transferring wealth can produce greater utility for poorer people. | May sacrifice individual rights for aggregate welfare. |
| Rawlsian justice | Institutions should follow principles chosen behind the veil of ignorance. The difference principle permits inequality only when it benefits the least advantaged. | Hypothetical agreement may not create actual obligations. |
| Libertarianism | Respect self-ownership, voluntary exchange, and legitimate property rights. Nozick judges holdings by just acquisition and transfer. | Historical injustice can undermine current entitlements. |
| Capability approach | Secure genuine capabilities to live valuable lives; formal equality is insufficient when poverty blocks choice. | Which capabilities society must guarantee is contested. |
A common misconception is that distributive justice necessarily requires equal wealth. Many egalitarian theories accept inequality if people have fair opportunities, basic needs are met, or inequalities improve the position of the least advantaged. This differs from strict equality of outcome.
In an IB Philosophy response, define distributive justice, compare at least two competing principles, and apply them to a concrete issue such as progressive taxation or inherited wealth. To evaluate, test assumptions: Is taxation coercive? Can unequal outcomes be fair? Should justice prioritize welfare, entitlement, or capabilities? Explain a counterargument and finish with a reasoned judgment rather than listing theories, supported by clear analysis of the chosen example and its implications.
