Envy By Justin D Arms: An Analysis
Envy is considered to be puzzling and complex emotion when one is in need of a certain object another person or group may have. According to, the article “Envy” written by Justin D’Arms, he classifies this emotion as a form of pain when one’s self-worth or self-esteem is diminished. However, envy is also one of the seven deadly sins according to the Catholic religion, and philosophers have a troubling time on precisely arguing what envy is about. In a way, envy is similar to jealousy, however, there are a few distinctions between the two. To clarify, jealousy involves three specific parts and those are the subject, the rival, and the beloved. As with envy, this emotion strongly focuses on the rival. Even more, a society that has envious intentions
…show more content…
Those unfamiliar with Karl Marx, the egalitarian normative theorist insists that the “first phase of communist society the economy will distribute goods according to the norm, to each according to his labor contribution” (Arneson 56). Basically, Marx is stating that a society should satisfy its people by creating a form of equal opportunity, and yet those who cannot contribute or do not have the proper skill in contributing cannot be rewarded, thus making this type of society defective. With regards to this, Marx discarded this norm and claimed that if the communist society is attained by higher phase, then the society can eventually “move beyond the sphere of bourgeois right altogether and operate according to the norm, from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” (Arneson 56). Marx’s is presenting how equality can be achieved if one is able to contribute anything according to his or her …show more content…
Since envy and egalitarian go hand and hand, recent research was done by a Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at the University of Michigan, Elizabeth Anderson, noticed that the “concern of distributive justice is to compensate individuals for misfortune” (290). In a way, this approach is similar to a humanitarian approach because the misfortune is not able to come up with knowledge or money as frequent as those who do. Anderson had criticized one of Ronald Dworkin’s writings about how that equality is “envy-free” and how this further demonstrates that egalitarian views are solely based on “mere envy” (287). The reason why this type of society can hide the fact its based off of mere envy is by distributing positive attributes that cannot be distributed fairly. This is why so many individuals may feel cheated on because they cannot inherit the proper necessities from their inherited
Those unfamiliar with Karl Marx, the egalitarian normative theorist insists that the “first phase of communist society the economy will distribute goods according to the norm, to each according to his labor contribution” (Arneson 56). Basically, Marx is stating that a society should satisfy its people by creating a form of equal opportunity, and yet those who cannot contribute or do not have the proper skill in contributing cannot be rewarded, thus making this type of society defective. With regards to this, Marx discarded this norm and claimed that if the communist society is attained by higher phase, then the society can eventually “move beyond the sphere of bourgeois right altogether and operate according to the norm, from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” (Arneson 56). Marx’s is presenting how equality can be achieved if one is able to contribute anything according to his or her …show more content…
Since envy and egalitarian go hand and hand, recent research was done by a Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at the University of Michigan, Elizabeth Anderson, noticed that the “concern of distributive justice is to compensate individuals for misfortune” (290). In a way, this approach is similar to a humanitarian approach because the misfortune is not able to come up with knowledge or money as frequent as those who do. Anderson had criticized one of Ronald Dworkin’s writings about how that equality is “envy-free” and how this further demonstrates that egalitarian views are solely based on “mere envy” (287). The reason why this type of society can hide the fact its based off of mere envy is by distributing positive attributes that cannot be distributed fairly. This is why so many individuals may feel cheated on because they cannot inherit the proper necessities from their inherited