Amartya Sen's poser:
Take three kids and a flute. Anne says the flute should be given to her
because she is the only one who knows how to play it. Bob says the flute
should be handed to him as he is so poor he has no toys to play with.
Carla says the flute is hers because she made it.
Sen argues
that who gets the flute depends on your philosophy of justice. Bob, the
poorest, will have the support of the economic egalitarian. The
libertarian and the Marxist would opt for Carla since she made it. The utilitarian will argue for Anne
because she will get the maximum pleasure, as she can actually play the
instrument.
Sen states there are no institutional arrangements that can
help us resolve this dispute in a universally accepted and just manner.
Other Comments:
1. Instead of asking how to allocate the flute between the three children,
why not ask first under which rules would the flute have come into
existence? If Carla knew she would not get the flute, she would not
have made it. Therefore, just add a time dimension to the puzzle, and
there's no puzzle at all: only a libertarian form of justice is
consistent with the flute existing.
2. There are, alas, quite a few people who believe that if the flute isn't
allocated according to their favorite rule, then it is better for the
world if there is no flute.
3. I agree Sen forgot about the production issue. He also neglected David,
who says the flute is his because he is strongest and will hurt anyone
who denies him.