Property and welfare in liberal political philosophy
In Anarchy, State, and Utopia, Robert Nozick argues that only a minimal, nightwatchman state is morally justified because a state with more extensive powers ~violates persons' rights not to be forced to do certain things~. He writes that his view implies that the state may not justly compel ~some citizens to aid others~. It is the justification of compelling ~some citizens to aid others~ that is the subject of this dissertation. In arguing for his position, Nozick invokes the name and prestige of two foremost liberal philosophers, Locke and Kant. It is shown that these two philosophers to whom Nozick turns for support do not support him at all, for they, like other philosophers in the liberal tradition such as Mill and Reid, argue that the property rights of the affluent be limited to provide for the needs and welfare of those unable to do so for themselves, that the state may justly compel some citizens to aid others. It is possible that, while Nozick is not, as he believes, a true disciple of Locke and Kant, or, indeed, in the mainstream liberal tradition on this important aspect of distributive justice, he has, nevertheless, produced a theory of property rights that can stand on its own merits, without
Mayor, Jennifer Louise
Philosophy
Property and welfare in liberal political philosophy. In Anarchy, State, and Utopia, Robert Nozick argues that only a minimal, nightwatchman state is morally justified because a state with more extensive powers ~violates persons' rights not to be forced to do certain things~. He writes that his view implies that the state may not justly compel ~some citizens to aid others~. It is the justification of compelling ~some citizens to aid others~ that is the subject of this dissertation. In arguing for his position, Nozick invokes the name and prestige of two foremost liberal philosophers, Locke and Kant. It is shown that these two philosophers to whom Nozick turns for support do not support him at all, for they, like other philosophers in the liberal tradition such as Mill and Reid, argue that the property rights of the affluent be limited to provide for the needs and welfare of those unable to do so for themselves, that the state may justly compel some citizens to aid others. It is possible that, while Nozick is not, as he believes, a true disciple of Locke and Kant, or, indeed, in the mainstream liberal tradition on this important aspect of distributive justice, he has, nevertheless, produced a theory of property rights that can stand on its own merits, without
property welfare liberal political_philosophy anarchy state utopia argue minimal state morally justified state extensive power person right force certain things view implies state may justly compel some citizen aid others justification compel some citizen aid others subject dissertation argue position invoke name prestige foremost liberal philosopher locke kant show philosopher turn support support like philosopher liberal tradition mill argue property_right affluent limit provide need welfare unable state may justly compel citizen aid others possible believe true disciple locke kant indeed mainstream liberal tradition important_aspect distributive_justice nevertheless produce theory property_right stand merit without