Moral Deserts

Wikipedia gives us a discussion of Desert, here, and then this little bit:

One of the most controversial rejections of the concept of desert was made by the political philosopher John Rawls.  Rawls, writing in the mid to late twentieth century, claimed that a person cannot claim credit for being born with greater natural endowments (such as superior intelligence or athletic abilities), as it is purely the result of the 'natural lottery'.  Therefore, that person does not morally deserve the fruits of his or her talents and/or efforts, such as a good job or a high salary.  However, Rawls was careful to explain that, even though he dismissed the concept of moral Desert, people can still legitimately expect to receive the benefits of their efforts and/or talents.  The distinction here lies between Desert and, in Rawls' own words, 'Legitimate Expectations'.

Part of this sounds oddly familiar.

At any rate, over at The Right Coast Law Professor Tom Smith looks at the Roanoke Speech and gives us "Nirvana fallacy and you didn't build that".

Regards  —  Cliff