question archive Nozick's Wilt Chamberlain example (updated by Professor Sandel to the Michael Jordan example) is supposed to illustrate that
Nozick's Wilt Chamberlain example (updated by Professor Sandel to the Michael Jordan example) is supposed to illustrate that
Subject:BusinessPrice:3.87 Bought7
Nozick's Wilt Chamberlain example (updated by Professor Sandel to the Michael Jordan example) is supposed to illustrate that ...
a) ... liberty upsets patterns and, therefore, patterned conceptions of justice require illegitimate restrictions of liberty.
b) ... liberty upsets patterns and, therefore, the entitlement conception of justice (justice in holdings and justice in transfer) requires illegitimate restrictions of liberty.
c) ... liberty does not upset patterns and, therefore, patterned conceptions of justice are more plausible than the entitlement conception of justice (justice in holdings and justice in transfer).
d) ... no matter how just an initial distribution may be, voluntary interaction among free agents will always lead to injustice.
e) ... there is no such thing as a just distribution of goods
Purchase A New Answer
Custom new solution created by our subject matter experts
GET A QUOTE
Answer Preview
Answer:
b) ... liberty upsets patterns and, therefore, the entitlement conception of justice (justice in holdings and justice in transfer) requires illegitimate restrictions of liberty
Noticeably, Nozick was a proponent of the "entitlement" theory of justice, which holds that the distribution of holdings or properties in a society is just if and only if everyone in that society is entitled to what he/she deserves. The personal holdings of various social and economic goods are justified if and only if they emerge from voluntary (free) transfers or equitable distribution. Hence, the principles of justice in acquisition (initial holdings) and justice in transfer (free market) determines whether the social and economic goods were acquired justly.
