THEORIES OF JUSTICE: ANALYSING RAWLS AND NOZICK
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29121/shodhkosh.v5.i1.2024.3847Keywords:
Justice As Fairness, Entitlement Theory, Difference Principle, Minimal State, Equality, Individual Rights, State Intervention.Abstract [English]
The ideas of justice in political theory as expressed by John Rawls and Robert Nozick are contrasted in this study. Mostly from his ideas of liberty and the Difference Principle, Rawls argues using his theory of Justice as Fairness for a distributive approach whereby disparities are allowed only if they aid the least advantaged in society. On the other hand, Nozick underlines in his Entitlement Theory the defence of personal rights and lawful acquisition of property, therefore favouring a limited state and opposing redistributive justice. This study juxtaposes Nozick's advocacy for individual liberty, free market transactions, and minimal government involvement with Rawls's focus on social welfare, equality, and state intervention. Particularly in discussions on taxes, property rights, and welfare policies, the study highlights the ongoing relevance of both theories in contemporary political philosophy. This is achieved by analysing significant differences, such as their perspectives on equality, distributive justice, and the role of the government. Emphasising that Rawls provides a framework for resolving social inequality, the last part of the paper evaluates the application and limits of both theories while underlining that Nozick makes a strong case for maintaining personal liberty. From these different points of view, current political rhetoric still shapes debates on justice, equality, and rights.
References
Adie, O. T., & Effenji, J. S. (2018). The Entitlement Theory of Justice in Nozick’s Anarchy, State and Utopia. GNOSI: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Human Theory and Praxis, Vol. 1(1), 79-86.
Ari, A. S. (2023). Drawbacks of the Rawlsian Theory of Justice: The Issue of Structural Inequalities and the Question of Operationalization. A Quest for, 216.
Barnett, R. (1977). Whither anarchy? Has Robert Nozick justified the state?. Journal of Libertarian Studies, 1(1), 15-21.
Bernstein, A. R. (2023). Rawlsians and Other Kantians. In The Kantian Mind (pp. 541-553). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003406617-61
Coleman, J. S., Frankel, B., & Phillips, D. L. (1976). Robert Nozick's anarchy, state, and utopia. Theory and Society, 3(3), 437-458. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00159496
Corlett, J. A. (Ed.). (2016). Introduction. In Equality and liberty: analyzing Rawls and Nozick. Springer.
Darnal, A. (2023). Social Justice in India: A Comparative Study of Rawls and Ambedkar. Comparative Philosophy, 14(1), 5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31979/2151-6014(2023).140105
Davis, M. (1977). I. Necessity and Nozick's Theory of Entitlement. Political Theory, 5(2), 219-232. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/009059177700500206
Dorsey, D. (2005). Global justice and the limits of human rights. The philosophical quarterly, 55(221), 562-581. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0031-8094.2005.00416.x
Ficker, M. (2014). Nozick’s Entitlement Theory of Justice: A Response to the Objection of Arbitrariness. Aporia, 24(1), 51-62.
Follesdal, A. (2014). John Rawls’ theory of justice as fairness. In Guttorm Floistad (ed.) Philosophy of Justice (pp. 311-328). Dordrecht. Springer Netherlands. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9175-5_18
Gališanka, A. (2019). John Rawls: The path to a theory of justice. Harvard University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvfb6z6f
Gläser, M. (2023). Nozick on the difference principle. Politics, Philosophy & Economics, 22(2), 126-159. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594X231156931
Ivanov, D. (2023). The views on distributive justice and economic inequality revisited: the political philosophy and the economic perspectives on (in) equality. Open Research Europe, 2(89), 89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12688/openreseurope.14940.2
Kaufman, A. (2004). The myth of the patterned principle: Rawls, Nozick and entitlements. Polity, 36(4), 559-578. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/POLv36n4ms3235402
Lauchli, U. M. (1994). What Distributive Justice-The Legal Theories of Rawls and Nozick. Tilburg Foreign L. Rev., 4, 169. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/221125995X00202
Meadowcroft, J. (2011). Nozick’s critique of Rawls: Distribution, entitlement, and the assumptive world of A theory of justice. The Cambridge companion to Nozick's Anarchy, State, and Utopia, 168-196. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CCOL9780521197762.011
Moroni, S. (2023). What can urban policies and planning really learn from John Rawls? A multi-strata view of institutional action and a canvas conception of the just city. Planning Theory, 22(4), 404-425. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/14730952231163274
Nozick, R. (1973). Distributive justice. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 45-126.
Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, State, and Utopia. United Kingdom. Blackwell.
Nweke, C. C., & Enemuo, J. C. (2021). Influences of John Locke and John Rawls in shaping Robert Nozick’s Entitlement theory of justice. Ogirisi: A New Journal of African Studies, 17(1), 65-75.
Pandey, N. N., & Jaiswal, M. (2022). A Comparative Study of Theory of Justice: In Reference to Rawls And Nozick. Journal of Positive School Psychology, 6(8), 2362-2373.
Plato (2015). The Republic. New Delhi. Fingerprint Publishing.
Psarras, H. (2010). A critique of Robert Nozick's critique of patterned principles of justice. ARSP: Archiv für Rechts-und Sozialphilosophie/Archives for Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy, 239-249. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25162/arsp-2010-0019
Raekstad, P. (2021). The radical realist critique of Rawls: a reconstruction and response. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 27(2), 183–205. https://doi.org/10.1080/13698230.2021.1891377 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13698230.2021.1891377
Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge MA. Harvard University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674042605
Rawls, John (1999). The Law of Peoples: With “The Idea of Public Reason Revisited.” Cambridge MA. Harvard University Press.
Rendtorff, J. D. (2023). Political Philosophy Against Populism: Democratic Theory of Justice as Justification of Human Rights and Citizenship in Political. In Globalization, Human Rights and Populism: Reimagining People, Power and Places (pp. 147-170). Cham. Springer International Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-17203-8_8
Salahuddin, A. (2018). Robert Nozick’s entitlement theory of justice, libertarian rights and the minimal state: A critical evaluation. Journal of Civil & Legal Sciences, 7(1), 1-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4172/2169-0170.1000234
Sandel, M. (2005). Liberalism and the Limits of Justice. In Debates in contemporary political philosophy (pp. 150-169). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203986820-14
Schaefer, D. L. (2007). Procedural versus substantive justice: Rawls and Nozick. Social Philosophy and Policy, 24(1), 164-186. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265052507070070
Schaefer, D. L. (2008). Robert Nozick and the Coast of Utopia. The New York Sun. Retrieved from: https://contemporarythinkers.org/john-rawls/commentary/nozick-rawls-david-lewis-schaefer/
Shakil, A., & Guru, G. (Eds.). (2023). Spheres of Injustice. Taylor & Francis Group. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429355974
Syla, D. (2018). Two principles of justice in the philosophy of John Rawls and libertarian critique of Robert Nozick (M.A. Memoir submitted to Université de Montréal).
Töns, J., & Dip, B. H. (2018). Global Justice: A Rawlsian Perspective (Doctoral dissertation, Flinders University, College of Business, Government and Law).
Tons, John (2021). John Rawls and Environmental Justice: Implementing a Sustainable and Socially Just Future. London. Routledge DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003110736
Varden, H. (2016). Rawls vs. Nozick vs. Kant on Domestic Economic Justice. Kant and Social Policies, 93-123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42658-7_5
Wenar, Leif. (2021). “John Rawls”. In Edward N. Zalta (Ed.) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Wong, B. (2023). Is it Sectarian for a Rawlsian State to Coerce Nozick? – On Political Liberalism and the Sectarian Critique. Philosophia, 51(1), 367-387. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-021-00351-5
Yezzi, R. (1986). Individuals and Society: Rawls and Nozick. In Directing Human Actions: Perspectives on Basic Ethical Issues, 246 – 267. Maryland: University Press of America.
Zhang, Y. (2021). The Idea of Persons as Equals and Property Rights: In Between Nozick and Rawls (Doctoral dissertation, Hong Kong Baptist University).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Durgesh Verma
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
With the licence CC-BY, authors retain the copyright, allowing anyone to download, reuse, re-print, modify, distribute, and/or copy their contribution. The work must be properly attributed to its author.
It is not necessary to ask for further permission from the author or journal board.
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
