Robert Nozick, a late Harvard professor was a strong supporter of libertarianism - a group of individuals that identifies justice with liberty; freedom of choice. Nozick proposed that people have a certain moral right, which he called Lockean rights. Lockean rights or “natural rights” was a theory that every man has a right to life, liberty and property. The right to life, meant that everyone is entitled to live. The right to liberty, entitled everyone the right to do anything they wanted, if it did not conflict with others. The right to property, entitled everyone to own all that they had created or gained through gift or trade.
Nozick stated that “people are entitled to their holdings (goods, money and property) as long as they have acquired them fairly” (Shaw, 2011). Nozick considered this the entitlement theory.
Nozick's entitlement theory covered 3 main principles:
A …show more content…
After an extended amount of time receiving these additional ticket sales he would receive more money than any other person. If justice is to be maintained, there must be continual redistribution among individuals. This would be unlikely though given that the individuals agreed to voluntarily contributed to this because, they are entitled to use their resources however they please. You cannot have both a theory of distributive justice that is based on a specific pattern of wealth distribution and give people liberty over their private property. Furthermore, people are free to dispose of their income as they please, if they chose to pay the additional income to Wilt that would be their right. Nozick’s point is if you believe in pattern theories of distributive justice, you must put constraints on people’s liberty to dispose of their income or it will upset the pattern. You can have one or the other, but not
Nozick stated that “people are entitled to their holdings (goods, money and property) as long as they have acquired them fairly” (Shaw, 2011). Nozick considered this the entitlement theory.
Nozick's entitlement theory covered 3 main principles:
A …show more content…
After an extended amount of time receiving these additional ticket sales he would receive more money than any other person. If justice is to be maintained, there must be continual redistribution among individuals. This would be unlikely though given that the individuals agreed to voluntarily contributed to this because, they are entitled to use their resources however they please. You cannot have both a theory of distributive justice that is based on a specific pattern of wealth distribution and give people liberty over their private property. Furthermore, people are free to dispose of their income as they please, if they chose to pay the additional income to Wilt that would be their right. Nozick’s point is if you believe in pattern theories of distributive justice, you must put constraints on people’s liberty to dispose of their income or it will upset the pattern. You can have one or the other, but not