November 16, 2017
Draft Paper
Shakhzoda Abdusalomova
Robert Nozick’s Distributive Justice
Abstract
In this paper, I would like to talk about how Nozicks made the individual, and his rights to life. And I am strongly agreed with Robert Nozick’s life style and his arguments. Robert Nozick theory of justice explains how hard work and great talent pays off at the end. In reality the poor just gets poorer and the rich get richer. For example, the rich person has the ability to go and live wherever he or she desires, but the poor is left with not many options of choosing where to stay or go. Nozick believes everyone has their own right and should get justice that is fair. I think each philosopher have their own advocate. …show more content…
In the light of his right theory of justice. Robert Nozick was an American academic and renowned political philosopher, born in Brooklyn, New York, and he taught at Harvard University. Throwing light on impotent aspects of Rawl’s theory of justice we now begin on another theory of justice by Robert Nozick. However, Nozick developed his theory in response to Rawls’ theory and he based his theories of justice on rights. Nozick’s entitlement theory of justice is historical. It claims that we can tell whether a distribution of good is just or not by looking at its history. The tricky thing is that Nozick said almost nothing about how to fill in what those three principles require. For example , the rich people has the ability to go and live wherever he or she wants, but the poor people is left with not many options of choosing where to stay or go as we all know life is not fair. Because he thought he had two highly abstract arguments that could clear the field of all …show more content…
He said “the general outlines of a theory of justice in holdings are that the holdings of a person are just if he is entitled to them by the principles of justice.” If anyone who got what he has in a manner consistent with these three principles would Nozik said no one has any grounds for complaint against him. This gives us Nozick entitlement theory of distributive justice. What matters is only that people get what they have in manner consistent with the three principles of justice in holding, and this is capable with some people having much more than others. Unlikely hard workers having less than lazier but likely people, morally serving individuals having higher incomes than others. And it is therefore equal or unequal it happens to be, and indeed fair or unfair it might seem known to be. In the other hand Nozick argues about the Wilt Chamberlain example. The example is supposed to show that so called patterned principles of justice objectionably limit liberty. Here are some examples of patterns that seem like superficially candidates for being requirements of justice, the distribution is equal, or it maximizes, or it apportion goods. The problem was that it was hard to show that all of these views reached the intolerable result of banning capitalist acts among adults. The others either clearly favored