From my article published in 'New review of doctrine and jurisprudence' No. 6 / 08:
-
"Already a few years after the release of A Theory of Justice , John Rawls's theory has met with opposition from radical of another American scholar Robert Nozick.
Nozick's work, translated into Italian under the title ' Anarchy, State, Utopia' , was published in 1974. With
Smithian character of his doctrine, Rawls Nozick opposes the activation of a "dominant protective agency and monopolistic" [1] , Stefano Petrucciani organization called "security company" [2] , which pursues 'aim to protect the rights of each individual by imposing obligations and costs to the members of society. He compares
anarchy Lockean state of nature, basing his entire theory on a policy of principles which holds most: each individual has inviolable principles that the State must respect.
Compared to the retail aspects of the theory of Rawls, Nozick is expressed in the sense that the distribution of wealth would be meaningless act because the democracy is the protection of what everyone has, all this, apparently very reductionist, assuming that each of the associated only available in a legitimate way of goods and riches that were outset, so just acquired. With
Nozick there is "the genesis of the state minimum, which is legitimate because it comes without violating the rights of anyone, those who have been prevented, for the safety of all, of their own justice, have been compensated with the free gift of security services and thus have not suffered any wrong " [3] .
Nozick supports the thesis that a community may legitimately be made without the need for minimal state that members enter into a contract, but said Stefano Petrucciani "forced inclusion of the independents in the state, as far as they compensate for what they lose, seems rather at odds with the libertarian approach that Nozick himself says it wants to defend, and could therefore undermine the whole of its construction " [ 4] .
It was noted that as the theory of Nozick does not consequenzialistica (ie, claims that the rights of persons can not be judged based on the consequences of their actions), it neglects the disadvantaged strata of the population. "
Nozick's work, translated into Italian under the title ' Anarchy, State, Utopia' , was published in 1974. With
Smithian character of his doctrine, Rawls Nozick opposes the activation of a "dominant protective agency and monopolistic" [1] , Stefano Petrucciani organization called "security company" [2] , which pursues 'aim to protect the rights of each individual by imposing obligations and costs to the members of society. He compares
anarchy Lockean state of nature, basing his entire theory on a policy of principles which holds most: each individual has inviolable principles that the State must respect.
Compared to the retail aspects of the theory of Rawls, Nozick is expressed in the sense that the distribution of wealth would be meaningless act because the democracy is the protection of what everyone has, all this, apparently very reductionist, assuming that each of the associated only available in a legitimate way of goods and riches that were outset, so just acquired. With
Nozick there is "the genesis of the state minimum, which is legitimate because it comes without violating the rights of anyone, those who have been prevented, for the safety of all, of their own justice, have been compensated with the free gift of security services and thus have not suffered any wrong " [3] .
Nozick supports the thesis that a community may legitimately be made without the need for minimal state that members enter into a contract, but said Stefano Petrucciani "forced inclusion of the independents in the state, as far as they compensate for what they lose, seems rather at odds with the libertarian approach that Nozick himself says it wants to defend, and could therefore undermine the whole of its construction " [ 4] .
It was noted that as the theory of Nozick does not consequenzialistica (ie, claims that the rights of persons can not be judged based on the consequences of their actions), it neglects the disadvantaged strata of the population. "
John Graziano missing
[1] So Veca, op.cit., p.69
[2] See S. Petrucciani, op.cit., p.215
[3] See S. Petrucciani, ibid.
[4] See S. Petrucciani, ibid.
0 comments:
Post a Comment