Preview

John Rawl vs Robert Nozick

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1294 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
John Rawl vs Robert Nozick
John Rawls’ system of justice (Welfare liberalism) is at odds with Robert Nozick’s Classical liberalist position. Argumentatively discuss. There is a variety of perception on economic or distributive justice, material goods and services have no intrinsic value but are valuable only if they are shared. My essay is a critique and argument of John Rawl’s system of justice against Robert Nozick’s classical liberalism. I am in support of Nozick’s theory and will elaborate how the system of justice works within the society. John Rawls and Robert Nozick both agree on the point of view of human beings are considered equal and free (Schaefer, 2006). John Rawls claimed that the citizens had a veil of ignorance, which meant that the citizens makes a choice without the knowledge of their social position or natural abilities ( Langan, 1977). John Rawls implemented and supported two principles of justice which he thought will be universally accepted. First was the principle of liberty which he explained that each person has the right to the greatest equal liberty possible. The second principle was the principle of difference which stated that social and economic differences in society could only be justified if they benefited the worst off (Costa, 2009). John Rawls moral benchmark was equality towards all social and political institutions, and felt that any deviation from equality must be justified. According to (Costa, 2009), the central element of Rawls argument is in support of his principles of justice which is the citizens being free and equal. While (langan,2001) argues that Rawls main advocacy was for the balancing of conflict liberties, where there is no specific priority or value for any liberty. Rawls looked into freedom for citizens in political liberty, freedom of speech assembly, liberty of conscience and freedom of thought. Robert Nozick had a different idea to it, he claimed that rights to be absolute and not prima facie, he


References: Brown ,A. (2012). Rawls, Buchanan and the Legal Doctrine of legitimate Expectations. Social Theory and Practice. 38(4). 617 Francis, J. & Francis, L. (1976). Nozick’s Theory of Rights: A Critical Assessment. The Western Political Quarterly. 29(4) 634-644 Hevia, M. & Spector, E. (2008). The Bizarre World of Historical Theories of Justice: Revisiting Nozick’s Argument. Social Theory and Practice. 34(4). 533-549 Langan ,J. P. (1977). Rawls ,Nozick and The Search For Social Justice. Theological Studies. 38(2). 346-358 Schaefer, D.L. (2007). Procedural versus substantive justice: Rawls and Nozick. Social Philosophy and Policy.24(1). 164-186

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Powerful Essays

    Vago, S. (2009). Law and Society 9th Ed. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall…

    • 1612 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    John Rawls’ Fairness Approach is an appropriate ethical framework to use when assessing this dilemma. This approach questions if everyone involved is being treated fairly (is there favoritism and discrimination?). The Fairness Approach examines how fairly or unfairly the actions of an individual or group distribute benefits and burdens everyone else. With this approach, consistency of treatment among persons is key. The only insistence when treatment must differ is if there is a morally relevant difference between people (Andre, Meyer, Shanks, Velasquez, 1989). There are three different kinds of justice -- Distributive, Restorative, and Compensatory. Distributive justice focuses on the benefits and burdens evenly distributed amongst society’s…

    • 183 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    HCM 420 Mastery Exercises

    • 2182 Words
    • 8 Pages

    3. True or false? Rawls' view of social justice includes people making choices to protect those who are in a lesser position in society.…

    • 2182 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The United States Pledge of Allegiance is an honorable and commendable mantra. It concludes with, “one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.” Justice in the former reference is inclusive for everyone, an entitlement, granted upon birth. John Rawls position of justice is that “everyone should be treated equally and as fair as possible”. Mr. Rawls position parallels the Egalitarian theory of equality and mutual respect. This isn’t necessarily the practice because contrary to the hope for multiple factors are factored in to the outcome.…

    • 230 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Theories of justice are also referred to in the article. These theories utilize concepts by John Rawls which include ideas on how to “create an environment of opportunity and access by all to the most comprehensive range of prospects” (Colin, 2012, p. 444). This theory can lead to a society where individuals are given opportunities to succeed.…

    • 1775 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Just Deserts

    • 2084 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Rawls, J. (1971) A theory of justice The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. USA…

    • 2084 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    This paper aims to compare the ideas of equal opportunities and sports equity with regard to sport in Britain. Within this structure, there will be particular emphasis on the theoretical approaches that are used to look at equality in British sport. A key part of this comparison is the study of (social) equality; this includes formal, radical and liberal interpretations of equality. The arguments and suggestions will be reinforced and supported by literature and other texts outside of just the sporting context.…

    • 2881 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    A just society should be one that leads to progression and protects an individual's rights and freedoms. In this paper I will take Rawls position that we would create a more just society by creating a minimum standard of living for everyone. One of the main points presented in Nozick’s theory is that redistribution is wrong because it is unjust to steal resources that were justly earned from one person and to give it to someone else. In principle Nozick is correct that redistribution is unjust in the sense that we are taking resources from one person to give to another, however, Nozick’s view doesn’t account for the fact that people aren’t born with equal opportunity so without redistribution it results in a hierarchy that keeps increasing.…

    • 1471 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Metaparadigms of Nursing

    • 1854 Words
    • 8 Pages

    References: Barry, B. (1989). A treatise on social justice: Theories of justice. (Vol. 1). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.…

    • 1854 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Who Is Nozick's Rule?

    • 164 Words
    • 1 Page

    Robert Nozick gained fame as a leading American philosopher thanks to the success of his 1974 book, Anarchy, State, and Utopia. The books endeavours to further explore the anti-consequentialist elements that have been discussed by John Rawls in his book, A Theory of Justice. Nozick has identified the best tool with which to gauge state action is its respect for individual rights. Accordingly, a minimal state can be the only legitimate state given that its activities are limited to protecting an individual's rights of liberty, life, contract, and property. Nozick endeavours to refute the anarchist's claim by way of demonstrating how a minimal state might come about without infringing on individual rights. Nozick has also endeavoured…

    • 164 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The issue of distributive justice is relevant in our society due to current thoughts on economic inequality in politics. The political philosophers John Rawls and Robert Nozick have differing views when it comes to the topic of distributive justice. This analyze the positions of John Rawls and Robert Nozick, finding that Nozick’s view of distribution is preferable to Rawls’ difference principle because people deserve to keep what they earn and their earnings should not be taken away from them because that would be a violation of their personal liberties.…

    • 1823 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    Marijuana Legalization

    • 1409 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Polastre, Shevonne. "WHO Reports Shows 2.5 Million People Die of Alcohol-Related Deaths." Stop Alcohol Deaths. 15 Feb. 2011. Web. 22 Mar. 2012. <http://stopalcoholdeaths.com/2011/02/reports-shows-25-million-people-die-alcoholrelated-deaths/>.…

    • 1409 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Use of Force

    • 974 Words
    • 4 Pages

    References: Bruno, Lisa (2010) Justice 515 Class Syllabus pp 2. Retrieved from http://angel02.gcu.edu/AngelUploads/Content/JUS515 on 11-18-2010.…

    • 974 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Doing the Right Thing

    • 3356 Words
    • 14 Pages

    This excerpt is from Michael J. Sandel, Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do?, pp. 21-30, by permission of the publisher.…

    • 3356 Words
    • 14 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Rawls sides with Kant and believes that rights are created by individuals from a moral point of view, not…

    • 527 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays