ABSTRACT
In the “Equality of What?” literature the conception of and arguments proceeding from “expensive tastes” loom large. Expensive tastes are used by Dworkin and Sen against the idea that “welfare” or “utility” can be the currency or space in which to make judgments about equality.2 They are used by Cohen and Sen against the idea that “resources” can stand as that currency – though they do not use them in the same way (see pp. 202-3). The arguments marshaled in this regard depend upon testing our (egalitarian) intuitions about the justness of distribution given the examples developed around the “expensive tastes” criterion and the logical and conceptual consequences drawn from those arguments. I put “egalitarian” in quotes since, whilst it is undoubtedly our intuitions in terms of equality that are being teased in these examples, it is not clear to me how far we can demarcate our intuitions about justness that are based on egalitarian instincts as opposed to other considerations.
