John Rawls and Robert Nozick

Paper Summary:

This paper begins by articulating the philosophies and beliefs of both John Rawls and Robert Nozick as well as their ideas concerning distribution and justice. The paper discusses how Nozick's views are more fiscally conservative while Rawls' tend to be more socialistic. The paper then compares the two authors, namely in their shared belief that the individual should be allowed to pursue his own interests, provided it does not impede anyone else's ability to pursue his own goals. This paper also discusses both authors' opposition to to utilitarianism.

From the Paper:

"Nozick also discusses the topic of taxation and explains how it is unjust. It is the equivalent of forcing one to work for free. A portion of the worker's earnings is taken back by society, making the individual work for another person's purposes. Those who are poor and utilize the welfare programs made available are reaping the benefits of these worker's actions (Nozick, 1974). It is as if they have a claim to the labor of others; it is unjust for a person to be forced to work for the benefit of another. Thus, the distribution in this manner is unjust. Those workers are not choosing to give charity or work for other's well being but are forced to do so without freely entering into the relationship."

Sample of Sources Used:

• Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, state, and utopia. Basic Books.
• Rawls, J. (1999). A theory of justice. Belknap Press; Revised edition.

More papers on John Rawls and Robert Nozick:

• Comparison Essay # 61177 : "John Rawls: Political Philosopher"
• Comparison Essay # 106656 : "Nozick's Entitlement Theory"
• Comparison Essay # 103919 : "Social Choice Theory"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: