The paper asks four questions: (1) Is the bilateralism of law and economics praised by Calabresi a form of “reflective equilibrium”? (2) Is Mill’s harm principle compatible with “third-party moral costs”? (3) How are we to distinguish the moral externalities that are to be given weight from those that are not? (4) How are we to adjudicate between welfare and equality, between a larger but less equal pie and a smaller but more equal one? The first question has a positive answer and the second a negative one, whereas the last two do not have straightforward answers if we subscribe to value pluralism.

Calabresi and Mill: bilateralism, moral externalities and value pluralism

Giovanni Tuzet
2019

Abstract

The paper asks four questions: (1) Is the bilateralism of law and economics praised by Calabresi a form of “reflective equilibrium”? (2) Is Mill’s harm principle compatible with “third-party moral costs”? (3) How are we to distinguish the moral externalities that are to be given weight from those that are not? (4) How are we to adjudicate between welfare and equality, between a larger but less equal pie and a smaller but more equal one? The first question has a positive answer and the second a negative one, whereas the last two do not have straightforward answers if we subscribe to value pluralism.
2019
Tuzet, Giovanni
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
tuzet 2019-calabresi & mill.pdf

non disponibili

Descrizione: Articolo
Tipologia: Pdf editoriale (Publisher's layout)
Licenza: NON PUBBLICO - Accesso privato/ristretto
Dimensione 116.72 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
116.72 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11565/4022969
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 6
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact