Then the only justifiable state would be the libertarian one he described on the first page of the readings.
If so, that would eliminate any non-libertarian alternative. He maintains that when other views of distributive justice depart from the historical scheme they necessarily involve unacceptable infringements of liberty and violations of rights. Nozick leaves these matters open because he thinks he can clear the field of all competitors. And he has one highly influential paragraph about rectification. We can be sure that he approves of voluntary exchanges and gifts as legitimate ways of transferring property. It is pretty clear that he is inspired by Locke’s theory of property through labor, but he is highly critical of the details of that theory. The tricky thing about this chapter is that Nozick said almost nothing about how to fill in what those three principles say. I said that Nozick’s entitlement conception of justice holds that there are three principles of distributive justice. I’m going to ask you to describe some patterns that we commonly use when we are trying to say whether a society is just or not.Īfter doing that, we will talk about why Nozick would have a problem with the patterns we listed. The important thing about the entitlement conception is that it excludes what Nozick calls patterns. (What do I mean by “principle?” I mean an abstract rule, such as “property transferred through a voluntary gift belongs to the person to whom it is given.” That is an example of a principle of transfer.) If so, then the resulting distribution is just if not, then not. If they were not, then we have to ask whether the injustice was rectified according to the third principle. If the goods were acquired and transferred according to the first two principles, then the resulting distribution is just. Specifically, it tells us that there are only three kinds of principles to use in determining whether a distribution of goods is just or unjust. It claims that the way to tell whether a distribution of goods is just or not is by looking at its history. The most important thing about this theory is that it is historical. Nozick presents what he calls the entitlement theory of distributive justice. This is concerned with the distribution of material goods and opportunities for desirable social positions like jobs or political offices. We are talking about a specific part of justice here: distributive justice.
Nozick on Justice Political Philosophy Fall 2021 Nozick on Justice Overview
0 kommentar(er)
