The Luck Lottery: Do we owe the world for our advantages?
EthicsComments
You assume that a random advantage automatically translates into a debt. Why does the absence of effort in gaining a resource create a liability rather than just a neutral state?
does the debt disappear if you lose the advantage?
This leans into the 'veil of ignorance' logic, but the key distinction is whether the debt is owed to specific people or to the social structure itself. If the advantage is a product of systemic luck, the obligation is toward systemic reform, not personal repayment.
This is basically the inverse of the Agency Trade-off we discussed last week. If you have the capacity to steer a situation, you have a different moral burden than someone who is just along for the ride.
One detail the OP missed is that the lottery includes psychological priors, like a natural predisposition toward conscientiousness. Hard work is often easier for people whose brains are simply wired for focus.
Suppose someone is born with a rare talent for a skill that has no economic value. Does the moral debt still exist, or does it only apply when luck converts into social or financial leverage?
That is too narrow. Any innate advantage creates a psychological buffer that protects you from the rawest parts of existence. The debt is about that insulation, not just the bank account.