Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T20:55:08.102Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hume’s “Wilt Chamberlain Argument” and taxation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Kenneth Henley
Kenneth Henley*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Florida International University, 11200 S.W. 8th Street, Miami, FL33199, USA
*
*Email: henleyk@fiu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Robert Nozick addresses the idea of egalitarian redistribution in an argument standardly considered original: the “Wilt Chamberlain Argument”. However, this argument (without reference to Wilt Chamberlain) is found in David Hume's An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals, first published in 1751. Placing this argument within a Humean and Hayekian, rather than a Lockean or Kantian, perspective radically changes its import for issues of economic justice. Rather than vindicating the radical individualism of Nozick and other libertarians, applied to our circumstances using Hume's conventionalist and evolutionary account of justice, Hume's Wilt Chamberlain argument vindicates moderate redistribution constrained by the rule of general laws and the goal of fostering innovation and industriousness.

Keywords

HumeNozickHayekpropertytaxationWilt Chamberlainlibertarianism
Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy , Volume 42 , Issue S1: Hume in Alberta: Selected Papers from the 2012 Hume Conference in Calgary , February 2012 , pp. 148 - 160
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baier, Annette C. 2010. The Cautious, Jealous Virtue: Hume on Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Haakonssen, Knud 1981. The Science of a Legislator: The Natural Jurisprudence of David Hume and Adam Smith. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayek, F. A. 1944. The Road to Serfdom. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hayek, F. A. 1960. The Constitution of Liberty. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hayek, F. A. 1966. “The Legal and Political Philosophy of David Hume.” In Hume: A Collection of Critical Essays, edited by Chappell, V. C. 335–360. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayek, F. A. 1973. Rules and Order. Vol. 1 of Law, Legislation, and Liberty. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Marshall, M. G. 2000. “Luxury, Economic Development, and Work Motivation: David Hume, Adam Smith, and J.R. McCulloch.” History of Political Economy 32: 631–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, David 1981. Philosophy and Ideology in Hume's Political Thought. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Nozick, Robert 1974. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Rawls, John 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Skinner, Andrew S. 1993. “David Hume: Principles of Political Economy.” In The Cambridge Companion to Hume, edited by Norton, David Fate 222–254. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sobel, Jordan Howard 2009. Walls and Vaults: A Natural Science of Morals (Virtue Ethics According to David Hume). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soule, Edward 2000. “Hume on Economic Policy and Human Nature.” Hume Studies 26: 143–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Susato, Ryu 2006. “Hume's Nuanced Defense of Luxury.” Hume Studies 32: 167–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wennerlind, Carl 2002. “David Hume's Political Philosophy: A Theory of Commercial Modernization.” Hume Studies 28: 247–270.Google Scholar