



Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
Nozick entitlement theory in explain three principles, intuitive arguments for the entitlement theory and problems with the intuitive arguments.
Typology: Slides
1 / 7
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Libertarian approach to justice
Based on a Lockean conception of property
Principle of Transfer – whatever is justly acquired can be freely transferred.
Principle of Just Initial Acquisition – an account of how people come initially to own the things that can be transferred in accordance with principle (1)
Principle of Rectification of Injustice – how to deal with holdings if they were unjustly acquired or transferred.
Unlike Rawls’s theory, Nozick’s theory is not ‘endowment - sensitive’ but is ‘ambition - sensitive’
According to Nozick, only the minimalist state is the only morally justified state Enforcement of contracts Protection against force and fraud
D1: Just distribution of goods is provided by some rule R
D2: State which results from the movement from D1 according to principle(s) P.
If D1 is a just distribution, and the exchange of goods that results in D is not forced, then D2 is just.
Nozick stacks the deck by assuming that the rules and principles supporting D1 call for an absolute right to property. It may be that our initial just distribution would look Rawlsian