Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorRosati, Connieen
dc.contributor.authorACOSTA, GABRIEL GIBSON
dc.creatorACOSTA, GABRIEL GIBSONen
dc.date.accessioned2016-06-10T00:58:09Z
dc.date.available2016-06-10T00:58:09Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/612464
dc.description.abstractThe aim of this thesis is to give a critical examination to a philosophical argument in favor of a Universal Basic Income. I will argue that (i) the current state of resource distribution is unjust, according to principles espoused by Robert Nozick, and (ii) that Karl Widerquist’s conception of ECSO Freedom is a cogent conception of freedom that gives moral grounding to a Universal Basic Income. Then I analyze arguments against a Universal Basic Income by considering if different systems of resource distribution would more effectively adhere to ECSO Freedom. In the end, I conclude that (iii) transfers should be paid unconditionally and (iv) that transfers should be “basic”.
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.publisherThe University of Arizona.en
dc.rightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.en
dc.titleWHY PHILOSOPHERS SHOULD BE FED: THE QUESTION OF A UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOMEen_US
dc.typetexten
dc.typeElectronic Thesisen
thesis.degree.grantorUniversity of Arizonaen
thesis.degree.levelBachelorsen
thesis.degree.disciplineHonors Collegeen
thesis.degree.disciplinePhilosophy, Politics, Economics, and Lawen
thesis.degree.nameB.A.en
refterms.dateFOA2018-06-23T07:39:29Z
html.description.abstractThe aim of this thesis is to give a critical examination to a philosophical argument in favor of a Universal Basic Income. I will argue that (i) the current state of resource distribution is unjust, according to principles espoused by Robert Nozick, and (ii) that Karl Widerquist’s conception of ECSO Freedom is a cogent conception of freedom that gives moral grounding to a Universal Basic Income. Then I analyze arguments against a Universal Basic Income by considering if different systems of resource distribution would more effectively adhere to ECSO Freedom. In the end, I conclude that (iii) transfers should be paid unconditionally and (iv) that transfers should be “basic”.


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
azu_etd_mr_2016_0003_sip1_m.pdf
Size:
362.6Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record