StudentShare
Contact Us
Sign In / Sign Up for FREE
Search
Go to advanced search...
Free

Economic Justice Theories of Nozick and Rawls - Essay Example

Cite this document
Summary
The paper "Economic Justice Theories of Nozick and Rawls" concludes that two philosophers have done their best in explaining the issues that surround utilitarianism and libertarianism. Factors that led to the criticism of Rawl's theory by his fellow philosopher Nozick were discussed…
Download full paper File format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER95.6% of users find it useful
Economic Justice Theories of Nozick and Rawls
Read Text Preview

Extract of sample "Economic Justice Theories of Nozick and Rawls"

Nozick and Rawls theories of economic justice Introduction Based on the two eminent philosophers Nozick and Rawls, thetheory of economic justice of 1970s attempts to find a solution concerning the disruptive justice by embracing the most usual tools of social interception. One of the philosophers came up with what is termed as the justice of fairness. According to Rawls, the society can only achieve its objectives through the principle of reconciliation, liberty and equity. The main concern about the theory of justice is to account for the issues of justice and generate the best alternative results to people who face unjustified situations. The main agenda of the justice principle is to enhance fairness to society associated by conducts of injustices. The theory of economic injustice explains about the need to mitigate scarcity and altruistic desires affecting communities instead referring to fair choices that repel about societal ignorance by enhancing communal corporation and sorting to alternatives that can easily liberate from vices such as utilitarianism1. Despite Rawls’ theory of justice remaining popular for centuries, Nozick who drew a publication has brought similar claims that narrow to reconstruct societal injustices by emphasizing that status ultimately brings about bonding in social life. Nozick argues that Rawls theory was an intrinsic attempt to harmonize the situation of fairness amongst individuals who are constrained by factors of economic capitalism2. According to Nozick’s theory, he supports Rawls’ claim that injustice is mainly enhanced by difference in hierarchies where people who are rank least in the system withstand the worst of Marxist capitalism. While letting their argument to a similar perception, both Robert and Rawls have given clarification concerning societal injustices. Despite the fact that the two philosopher followed different directions while trying to clarify about the meaning of injustices, both arguably agreed that justice is a system where individuals should deliver performances on exactly what they are expected to tackle definite issues. Without indulging comprehensively into other sections of injustice system, Rawls clarifies injustice as a state of unfairness that is mainly attributed to when members of the society deviates from issues that necessitate rightful governing principles. However to achieve justice, the two philosophers have suggested that governing a society can be made better if the social, societal system is incorporated in the governmental structures3. Nozick’s theory though from distinct origin suggests that if philosophers get governing opportunity, the societal ruling will route the sources of injustice while seeking possible solutions to prevent future occurrence. However, Rawls believes that it is the principle mandate of the citizens to meet and make a decision to eradicate ignorance while focusing on issues that clarify on what is termed as either just or unjust4. According to his publication, Nozick believes to distrust his fellow philosophers because he argues that the principle of justice comes is ordained. Rawls who considers this as a noble lie to influence the trust of the society has discredited this. Consequently, Plato claims either justice or injustices are attributes to natural circumstances thus a citizen should not conform to the social contracts that bind them together as a social institution. Nozick’s opposition to Rawls claim Despite the fact that both Nozick Rawls claims about societal injustices, they adversely disagree on certain factors that amounts to either justice of injustice. According to Nozick’s theory, the rule of injustice is based on three basic assumptions. He explains how things that had no initial ownership can be posed, how the ownership can be made transferable to the next person and the legal quest to correct injustices that have already been in existence. In his critics to Rawls theory, he clarifies that it is untrue that a person deserves something only when he intentionally needs it. Therefore, individuals should concentrate on the development effort and aspiration to seek for talents5. This is on the contrary to Rawls perception who believes that the veil of ignorance is an essential part that allows the dissemination of natural talents and such distribution is one considered as one of the ways that deter the presence of societal injustice. However, Nozick’s theory has not any part of wage inequality. Instead, he talks about constructive inequality as a justifiable assumption, which is far much different from Rawls understanding of justice. In his theory, Rawls argues that must a society to work as a corporation because there are more gains achieved by working together as a team. Moreover, he articulates that a mutual collaboration of individual generates positive results to a formal market economy. Nozick who believes that the economy develops better in the presence of self-made persons with distinct personalities and productivities that do not require communal or joint effort has criticized this6. In defense to his critics, Nozick articulates that, in a corporative environment, the amount of wage per person cannot apply without causing strain to the rest of the group members thus subjecting a reduction to more potential individuals that could have been better when a person is independent. Rawls theory of justice illustrates that the inequality and economic goods only become important when they solve the welfare of unfortunate members of the society. He perceives to harmonize a communal form of civil autonomy of systems that he calls justice. Moreover, he supports the giving of nature an opportunity to determine the decision by so describing this as veil of ignorance7. In a contradictory attempt, Nozick criticizes that the political philosophy does not relate on the set structure of the state while supporting that what is important is the need for a state. Different from Rawls understanding of cooperation, he proposes that the government only be considered important if it successfully provides for the need of security and liberty for the local people. Conclusively, Nozick repels Rawls’s understanding of wage principle. He contradictory claim concerns that all members of the society must benefit from each other where less fortunate seek direct help of successful individuals. Nozick’s entitlement theory of justice According to Robert Nozick’s historical theory of injustice, people should exercise a narrow function protection against the force of injustices. He articulates that, issues such as theft, fraudulent activities or forceful enforcement of contracts are justified. In his opinion, he supports that at no time should state be given chance to violate the rights of the society through by being forced to carry out certain activities or otherwise classified as state injustice8. Based on natural assumptions, Nozick claims that the state has no obligation to redistribute peoples status of mind because such engagements has only attributed to the emergence of currency, which has been the epicenter of control of a welfare commitment. Nozick claims that it is possible to determine a just distribution of goods by referring to the history of that good. If the legitimacy traces in its channel of acquisition then justice exists. However, he confirms that if the legitimacy is not traced then is such a case there is no existence of justice. Moreover, Nozick believes of partnered principles where distribution of goods are said to have undergone justice only it follows some particular channel of distribution. However, this claim could prove futile to some extent because the proof of evidence was only based on the capitalism life, which is driven by consenting adults. In addition, Nozick argues that the state should not be used to effect distribution because it is likely to deter aggression of goods in the supply. Besides, by involving state powers, the mutual power that is meant to help each other cease thus of benefit to the whole group. Tax system in Korea and Drawbacks A number of barriers especially to the foreigners meet taxation system in Korea. The taxation office does not have an interactive site thus subjecting people to rely on annual handout sheets from the state. Some of the barriers brought by this taxation system include foreigners being subjected to pay taxes that are often held by the employers. Besides, the issues of surtax and resident surtax making it quite hard to determine the right value of the income tax return. Consequently, it is associated by various deductions some of which are less meaningful to both natives and the foreigners. Rawls- alternative utilitarianism Rawls argues on the foundation of two main principles utilitarianism. He points out that the majority of members of the society believe in the anarchy of justice. He articulates that the idea of utilitarianism determines individual’s perception while making positive decisions towards the best choices to the society. Rawls rule of utilitarianism has been possibly accepted positively by various societies who believe that the decision is vital in solving uncertainties by giving many options where a person makes a choice. In accordance to the theory of Rawls dispels claims that people involved at the initial stages while effecting utilitarianism has the potential to allocate probabilities. As such, he supports that such people lack the capability of handling probable calculations unless with maximizing utility rule. Consequently, the rule advices that, an individual should avoid groups that they feel are not comfortable to their social life. Whereas, other members of the society just believes it is unusual to embrace utilitarianism as part of social life9. Nozick- egalitarian liberalism American capitalists mainly influenced Nozick philosophical work of liberalism in the 19th century. In his liberal concepts, he dismisses welfare association as championed by Rawls, but embraces the idea of statesmanship, which he believes does not attribute to sense of quality. He supports government legitimacy to the later on the need to advocating better security, liberty and protection of property in case of any violent political situation. However, he was categorical when he stated that the state is not liable on the issues of full time security since it only has an obligation of state watchman-ship, but concluded that the citizens are at liberty to receive adequate security at the expense of state intervention10. Conclusion After extensive coverage about the theory of economic injustice, it has become possible to point out that the two philosophers have done their best in explaining the issues that surround utilitarianism and libertarianism. The paper also explores factors that led to the criticism of Rawls theory by his fellow philosopher Nozick. Moreover, Rawls recognized justice as fairness that also extends to the distribution of goods rightfully acquired while Nozick sees this as technical that is very difficult to ascertain. In a mathematical perspective, the theory illustrates if given enough information one it becomes quite possible to calculate the extent of justice decision, which has been made by someone. In addition, Nozick claims that it is possible to determine a just distribution of goods by referring to the history of that good. If the legitimacy traces in its channel of acquisition then justice exists. In conclusion, both Rawls and Nozick acquired philosophy poses senses of multiple connections toward the realization of justice in an institutionally based psychology. Bibliography: Zajac, Edward. Political economy of fairness. Cambridge, Mass. [u.a.] : MIT Press, 1995. Maffettone Sebastianano. Rawls: an introduction Cambridge, U.K. [u.a.] : Polity, 2010 Frohlich Norman. Choosing justice: an experimental approach to ethical theory. Berkeley : University of California Press, 1992. Read More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
  • CHICAGO
(“Nozick is right and Rawls is wrong Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words”, n.d.)
Nozick is right and Rawls is wrong Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words. Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/social-science/1645609-nozick-is-right-and-rawls-is-wrong
(Nozick Is Right and Rawls Is Wrong Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 Words)
Nozick Is Right and Rawls Is Wrong Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 Words. https://studentshare.org/social-science/1645609-nozick-is-right-and-rawls-is-wrong.
“Nozick Is Right and Rawls Is Wrong Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.org/social-science/1645609-nozick-is-right-and-rawls-is-wrong.
  • Cited: 0 times

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Economic Justice Theories of Nozick and Rawls

Definition of family

Introduction The concept of family has over the years changed but the basic concept lies behind closely related people who bind together on the basis of trust, reassurance, protection and reliance.... As time goes by the family concept especially in the developed world has become lose such that people from the same family no longer stay together, offer help to each other or even communicate....
5 Pages (1250 words) Essay

Principles of Justice Theories

The paper “Principles of justice theories” will look at a book that is about political philosophy and ethics that was written by John Rawls.... Principles of justice theories Rawls was a member of the social contract tradition and it is from this membership that he was able to come up with the principles of justice.... He developed an artificial device for his theories known as the original position in which they were to come up with the principles from an ignorant point of view....
6 Pages (1500 words) Essay

The Concept of Distributive Justice

The flaws of nozick's model include that the possibility of an unjust central distributor is not ruled out, the injustices of dispersed people are not explored, and the questions about the rights channels of distribution are not explored in details.... According to rawls, distributive justice serves to ensure that all is done in a manner that guarantees equality for all; nothing should be done to damage or hurt another person.... The arguments used by rawls in supporting his distributive justice include that all goods and liberties should be distributed equally among all people and the opportunities for positions or offices should be advanced in equitable manner (Wolff 57)....
4 Pages (1000 words) Essay

The theory of utilitarianism

It ignores actions that appear to be wrong in themselves; it espouses the concept that the end justifies the means; the principles may come into conflict with that of justice; and it is extremely difficult to formulate and establish satisfactory rules of application.... Utilitarianism theory is referred to by some as the consequentialist ethical theory....
5 Pages (1250 words) Essay

Philosophical Thoughts on the Notion of Justice

One of such greatly influential political philosophers of the twentieth century was John rawls, who is thought by many to be the most important political philosopher of his time in the whole English-speaking world.... More specifically, rawls, influenced by such liberal and legal theorists as Isaiah Berlin and Herbert L.... rawls obtained a unique position among modern political philosophers as he is often referred to by politicians and in the courts....
8 Pages (2000 words) Essay

Land Right Issues

In the book A Theory of Justice, John rawls makes efforts of solving the dilemma of distributive justice by using an alternative of the much familiar social contract device.... n this case, the issue of distributive justice is evidently in play.... This essay "Land Right Issues" is focused on the idea the right of Palestinians to return to their former land....
6 Pages (1500 words) Essay

Political Ideas, Their Policies and Ramifications

Through the theory of Justice and Fairness (rawls), one understands that equity is very fundamental to a person.... This can be summarized in rawls claim “each person has equal claim to a fully adequate scheme of equal basic rights and liberties.... The significance of equality under free market moralist occurs if neither of the involved parties physically force or threat the other party to give goods or service....
6 Pages (1500 words) Essay

Rawls and Nozick Theories on the Meaning of Individual

On the other hand, Nozick is Rawls and Nozick Theories on the meaning of Individual The primary difference between nozick and rawls is the legitimacyof the social power of individuals (Paul, Miller, and Paul 164).... rawls theory acknowledges on the role of democracy in a diverse society.... He argues that an individual should exercise political power over one… rawls practice of political power should be within the limits of the constitution....
1 Pages (250 words) Essay
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.
Contact Us