Abstract: Focusing on a particular facet of entitlement theory, I criticize the view that Nozick’s version of the theory provides an adequate description of procedural justice. I agree with Nozick that justice is procedural; however, I believe his entitlement theory as it currently stands is incomplete. I show that Nozick is committed to believing that the implied content of his entitlement theory is unjust, and therefore that a certain set of market transactions ought to be judged as legally wrong according to Nozick’s own political foundations. Furthermore, I demonstrate that the Non-Aggression Principle is inconsistent with what a procedurally just entitlement theory would require, and therefore diminishes the degree to which a full-fledged account of distributive justice can properly be called libertarian. Finally, I offer a principle intended as a starting point for a discussion of what constitutes just transfer, and briefly speculate as to the legal results of implementing such a principle.
Archives for July 2014
We are happy to announce that Volume 5 of Libertarian Papers is now available in a print edition. This volume contains all Libertarian Papers articles for 2013, including contributions by Walter Block, Paul Gottfreid, Stephan Kinsella, Xavier Méra, Jan Narveson, Ben O’Neill, Jakub Wisniewski, and many others.
Paper and ebook versions of past volumes of Libertarian Papers are also available.