The article explores the concept of opportunity hoarding, introduced by Richard Reeves, emphasizing the ethical implications of competition among limited opportunities. It outlines two primary moral concerns: which opportunities should be subject to competition and the means of achieving success in that competition. The author argues against eliminating competition entirely, stating that limited opportunities naturally create the need for some form of competition while acknowledging that such limitations should not arise from unethical practices. Examples highlight the inherent competition for desirable training or educational experiences, illustrating the complexities surrounding opportunity access.
Opportunity hoarding, a concept developed by Richard Reeves, occurs when parents give their children advantages in ways harmful to other children.
Opportunity hoarding raises two important moral concerns: the moral issue of what opportunities should be competitive and what means are morally acceptable in competitions.
While some might argue there should be no competition for opportunities... opportunity is always limited. If there are more people than opportunities, there must be competition.
These limits need not arise from any evil intent... Many runners will want to be trained by a legendary running coach, but she cannot coach everyone.
Collection
[
|
...
]