Nozick’s Entitlement Nozick’s Entitlement TheoryTheory

Libertarian approach to justiceLibertarian approach to justice

Based on a Lockean conception Based on a Lockean conception of propertyof property

3 Principles3 Principles

Principle of Transfer – whatever is justly Principle of Transfer – whatever is justly acquired can be freely transferred.acquired can be freely transferred.

Principle of Just Initial Acquisition – an Principle of Just Initial Acquisition – an account of how people come initially to account of how people come initially to own the things that can be transferred own the things that can be transferred in accordance with principle (1)in accordance with principle (1)

Principle of Rectification of Injustice – Principle of Rectification of Injustice – how to deal with holdings if they were how to deal with holdings if they were unjustly acquired or transferred.unjustly acquired or transferred.

Historical vs. End-Result Historical vs. End-Result PrinciplesPrinciples

Historical Principles: distributive Historical Principles: distributive principles that depends upon how principles that depends upon how a distribution came about.a distribution came about.

Current Time-Slice Principles Current Time-Slice Principles (End-Result Principles): justice of (End-Result Principles): justice of a distribution is determined by a distribution is determined by how things are distributed, based how things are distributed, based on on structural principlesstructural principles..

Entitlement Theory results in a Entitlement Theory results in a non-patterned distribution.non-patterned distribution.

Ambition vs. EndowmentAmbition vs. Endowment

Unlike Rawls’s theory, Nozick’s Unlike Rawls’s theory, Nozick’s theory is not ‘endowment-sensitive’ theory is not ‘endowment-sensitive’ but is ‘ambition-sensitive’but is ‘ambition-sensitive’

According to Nozick, only the According to Nozick, only the minimalist state is the only morally minimalist state is the only morally justified statejustified state Enforcement of contractsEnforcement of contracts Protection against force and fraudProtection against force and fraud

Intuitive argument for Intuitive argument for the entitlement theorythe entitlement theory

D1: Just distribution of goods is D1: Just distribution of goods is provided by some rule R1provided by some rule R1

D2: State which results from the D2: State which results from the movement from D1 according to movement from D1 according to principle(s) P.principle(s) P.

If D1 is a just distribution, and the If D1 is a just distribution, and the exchange of goods that results in exchange of goods that results in D2 is not forced, then D2 is just.D2 is not forced, then D2 is just.

Wilt Chamberlain Wilt Chamberlain ExampleExample

Wilt Chamberlain negotiates a Wilt Chamberlain negotiates a contract such that people place .25 contract such that people place .25 cents in a separate box in order to cents in a separate box in order to watch him play.watch him play.

At the end of the year Chamberlain At the end of the year Chamberlain receives $250,000, more than any receives $250,000, more than any other player in the league.other player in the league.

According to Nozick, Chamberlain According to Nozick, Chamberlain deserves the money voluntarily deserves the money voluntarily paid to him.paid to him.

Problem with the Problem with the intuitive argumentintuitive argument

Nozick stacks the deck by Nozick stacks the deck by assuming that the rules and assuming that the rules and principles supporting D1 call for principles supporting D1 call for an absolute right to property. It an absolute right to property. It may be that our initial just may be that our initial just distribution would look Rawlsiandistribution would look Rawlsian