![]() ![]() The rights defined by the principles of justice as fairness provide the background against which the dealings of community members occur, and ensure that the resulting distribution will be just”.īader RM (2010) Robert Nozick. Compare with Biesenthal ( 1978: 164): “If one lays particular stress on Rawls’s claim that justice as fairness attempts to use pure procedural justice to settle questions of particular distributive shares, then the differences between his and Nozick’s accounts of distributive justice are not as pronounced as they first might appear. The question is just which rules, which system of rights, we ought to adhere to”. Both hold that there ought to be rules of property and contract, that these ought to be respected, and that any particular person’s entitlements are determined by the free operation of that system. And a second objection: “Why should one’s entitlement extend to the whole object rather than just to the added value one’s labor has produced?” (Nozick 1974: 175).Īs Nelson ( 2002: 201) observes “Insofar as Rawls’s theory addresses the question of the justice of particular holdings of particular persons, his theory is actually similar to Nozick’s. Here is a first criticism of such a position by Nozick ( 1974: 175): “If I own a can of tomato juice and spill it in the sea so that its molecules mingle evenly throughout the sea, do I thereby come to own the sea, or have I foolishly dissipated my tomato juice?”. ![]() As known, according to Locke, even before a restrictive proviso of any kind comes into play, “improvement work” on a resource is required in order to justify its (original) acquisition. The interpretation of the Lockean proviso as both a necessary and sufficient condition is also based on the conviction that Nozick’s severe criticism of Locke’s theory of “added value” would seem to imply his rejection of that theory (as Varian 1975 Davis 1976 Lyons 1977 Wolff 1977 Ryan 1982 Waldron 1988 and Roark 2012: 690, also argue). The point is that Nozick says nothing about these possible additional conditions (Wolff 1991: 107). Other conditions would therefore need to be met for an original acquisition to be just. It might be held that the Lockean proviso is merely necessary. Another interpretation of Nozick’s thinking is possible.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |