Home » Liberalism » Essay on Nozicks Entitlement Theory Analysis

Essay on Nozicks Entitlement Theory Analysis

In chapter seven, Nozick introduces and defends what he calls the entitlement theory. The theory is about distributive justice. It states that it is possible for the people to acquire some permanent full owned rights in some parts of the world (Nozick 151). The idea presented is that from the fact that one has the legitimate rights of self-ownership, it is also possible to derive some legitimate private ownership of some parts of the world.

However, he clearly states that what he offers is only the sketch of that theory (Nozick 160). The most important part is where he discusses the conditions under which a person may acquire full wnership of the parts of the earth that previously has no owner. The discussion is referred to as the lock Kean proviso. After setting the conditions for legitimate acquisition such parts, what remains is the two principles one of just transfer and the other one for rectification (Nozick 175).

The just transfer principle asserts that if the owner of something volunteers to sell it legitimately, the person who buys the thing acquires full legitimate ownership of the item, “A person who acquires a holding in accordance with the principle of justice transfer, from someone else is entitled to the holdings” (Nozick 151). On the ther hand, the rectification principle talks about what should be done in the case the property is acquired in an unjust way (Nozick 224). Nozick provides characterization to be the guidance for all the theories of justice.

Moreover, he offers the suggestion that it is possible to do away with some broad classes of theories on the basis that they are more likely to be exposed to some decisive objection (Nozick 253). After the elimination of the broad cases, the only option that is left is to accept that the only credible theories of justice belong to the category he refers to historical entitlement. There is only one iew that is developed in this category, and it is known as the entitlement view (Nozick 292). Nozick says that for the entitlement view to be accepted the justice theory in holding must be accepted too.

An Objection to Nozick’s Argument That Libertarian State Could Come Into Being without Violating Rights A libertarian state is a state whose political philosophies promotes liberty. Liberty simply means free. The Libertarians objective is to maximize on the freedom of choice and freedom to act independently. Also in a liberty state, the political freedom is emphasized together with the voluntary association as well as he supremacy of the individual judgment (Huebert 2). According to Robert Nozick, a libertarian state can come into being without violation of the rights of others.

Nevertheless, this is not the mere truth; a libertarian state is hard to develop into a state where there will be no violation of others. Firstly, the libertarian state can come into being, but it can work only on freshly established states that have people who are committed to making the liberty state thrive. However, just like any other state, there must convince people who will come up with different opinions. This will lead to an emergence of an pposition that would be probably hostile to the founding principles of such state.

These opposing group will be performing against the set principles and therefore they might begin heinous acts such as stealing other people’s property and harming them (Huebert 135). Therefore, there will be a need to for a national security system that will ensure that the rights of other individuals are not violated. A judicial system will also be required to ensure justice to all people. Therefore, from the fact that not all people in a state that are committed to as libertarians, it would be difficult to establish a libertarian state.

Also, the principle of non-coercion is among the principles that are applicable in the libertarian state. Non-coercion refer allowing people to conduct their activities without initiation of force freely. However, the system may not work in the case of free markets. If people are to be given the freedom for the free market, there will be no system of regulating the prices of food. This may lead to hiking of the prices of the food which is a basic need. Only the wealthy people who will afford the food with the higher prices. The poor will not be in a position to buy the basic need.

This is a violation of their rights to affordable prices of ood. Higher prices of food may endanger the lives of the poor. This will be a gross violation of their rights for food and the right to live (Brennan 129). This is against the claim of Robert Nozick that the libertarian state can be established without violation of the right of others. It is evident that the rights of the poor will be violated in the free market. They will be denied their right to affordable food prices, which translates to indirect denial of their right to live.

Therefore, there is a need to use coercion to make sure that those without certain commodities will not be misused in the expense of freedom. Libertarians can seem like a very good philosophy from the view of a rational perspective. The question of why the government has to interfere with one’s life-giving rules to be followed is more prevalent in the ideas of a libertarian state. People tend to believe that provided they do not affect the rights of other they should be given the freedom to do what they want; “We do not have to get society’s permission to go about our lives.

We are not required to answer to or justify ourselves to others” (Huebert 1). However, there is a chink in this belief and ideology of the libertarian state. However, this idea is not real, but rather it is based on the assumption of the human psychology (Huebert 180). The assumption is that the human being is capable of understanding and articulating different preferences in addition to being able to act on them. However, the truths alienate from the assumptions. Most are the times when the preferences are just obscured. They are divided into two types namely; the short- term preferences and long-term preferences.

They can either be real or imagined. Similarly, they can be needs and wants. Nonetheless, it is not always the case that the decisions that the uman being will make will be in accordance with their understanding of the preferences. It is possible to make a decision that is beneficial, but it is also possible to make ones that can cause harm to oneself or others. It is not always the case that the people will exercise their freedom without violating the rights of the other. The environment and the individual status can have the capacity to change the one’s decision.

Therefore, in the beginning, the libertarian state can come into being, but as the environment changes, individual who were before committed as libertarian may make other ecision may violate the right of others (Huebert 208). For example, one may be forced to steal an item if his or her similar item gets depleted or even stolen by another person. A single case has the capacity of bringing down a whole libertarian state. Therefore, the theory Nozick is based on assumptions of the human psychology and therefore it is not true.

By the same mark, it would be very difficult for a libertarian state to come into being among the society without violating the rights of some of the members of the society. What binds a community together is common practices, habits, traditions, and customs. Common moral values is also another factor that binds the society together and enforces cooperation within it. A libertarian state with diversified customs and values is not united but fractured. Without the common bonds of the same culture, the personal freedom will be limited (Brennan 45).

The reason for this is because different cultures have different beliefs and what people in one culture consider to be the right thing might a violation to another person. This adds to the complicity of the Libertarian state coming into being, for example, it might be the culture of a certain group of people to go and bathe in the ivers. Another group of people may have the cultural notion that the practice is wrong since it makes the water unclean for er users. In such a case, each culture has a freedom to go and wash their bodies in the river.

However, this freedom is a violation of other’s rights since it makes the water unclean for home usage. Such hindrances of the diversity in the society make it difficult for the fulfillment of the Nozick’s statement. Furthermore, freedom is given by establishing such as a state may lead to actions which might later harm the entire society. In a libertarian state, the fact that the individuals are free to do hat they want, some may choose to start consumption of drugs since there will be no law that will restrict them. The act of taking drugs and mostly the young people would be exercising the freedom of choice.

Although the youths might not harm anyone in their actions, in the long run, the parents will have to be frustrated and probably incur a lot of money in rehabilitation and treatment process (Huebert 70). The reason why the parents will spend a lot of money is because everyone is allowed to exercise their freedom. This has a direct impact on the rights of the Parents since it denies them the full rights of uiding their children. This further illustrates that it is impossible for a state to come into being a libertarian because the freedom to others will be a violation and frustration to another person.

In addition, the establishment of the libertarian state will mean that everyone will have the freedom to use his or her resources without being questioned by anyone. This means that there will be tax system in the state. Therefore, there will be no resources to develop public facilities such as roads and hospitals. Without these facilities, it will become very difficult for the people to ccess the health facilities due to poor roads and also the hospital will not be in a capacity to serve the people (Brennan 111).

This applies to other social institutions such as education center and therefore this will be a violation of the people rights to good health care and better infrastructures. The government will, therefore, be required to come with a tax system that will force everyone to pay tax. Some may argue that forcing people to pay taxes is against their rights. However, their argument is not true because their taxes will be used to create and develop public facilities which will be used by everyone. Indeed paying axes will not be a violation of rights but it will give way to an enhancement of the rights to better public services.

In conclusion, the claim of Nozick that it is possible for a libertarian state to come into being without violation of other people’s right is misleading. There also many challenges that are related to the libertarian state. The diversity of the cultural practices complicates the state further in that some cultural practices of a particular community will be affecting the beliefs of the other community. Therefore, there is a need for the government to regulate the cultural practices to ensure equality in all the communities.

The free markets may become a source of exploitation of the poor. Moreover, not all the people in the society might have the same perspective. Some might develop an opposition and end up violating the rights of the rest. Also, lack of tax system in a libertarian state will lead deterioration of public facilities and therefore the government should enforce the law to force people to pay taxes to cater for the public services which benefit everyone in the state. Therefore, a libertarian state cannot come into being without violation of other people’s rights.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this essay please select a referencing style below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.