Shared more. Cited more. Safe forever.
    • advanced search
    • submit works
    • about
    • help
    • contact us
    • login
    View Item 
    •   MOspace Home
    • University of Missouri-Columbia
    • College of Arts and Sciences (MU)
    • Department of Philosophy (MU)
    • Philosophy publications (MU)
    • View Item
    •   MOspace Home
    • University of Missouri-Columbia
    • College of Arts and Sciences (MU)
    • Department of Philosophy (MU)
    • Philosophy publications (MU)
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
    advanced searchsubmit worksabouthelpcontact us

    Browse

    All of MOspaceCommunities & CollectionsDate IssuedAuthor/ContributorTitleSubjectIdentifierThesis DepartmentThesis AdvisorThesis SemesterThis CollectionDate IssuedAuthor/ContributorTitleSubjectIdentifierThesis DepartmentThesis AdvisorThesis Semester

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular AuthorsStatistics by Referrer

    Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State and Utopia

    Vallentyne, Peter
    View/Open
    [PDF] Book Chapter (114.4Kb)
    Date
    2006
    Format
    Book chapter
    Metadata
    [+] Show full item record
    Abstract
    Robert Nozick's Anarchy, State, and Utopia (1974), along with John Rawls's A Theory of Justice (1971), radically changed the landscape in analytic political philosophy. For much of the preceding half-century, under the influence of logical positivism's heavy emphasis on empirical verifiability, much of moral philosophy was taken up with meta-ethics (e.g., the semantics of moral discourse)—with little attention given to normative moral theories. Moreover, to the extent that normative theories were considered, utilitarianism was the center of attention. This all changed with the publication of Rawls's articulation and defense of liberal egalitarianism and Nozick's libertarian challenge to the legitimacy of anything more than the night-watchman state. At the core of Nozick's book are two arguments. One is that a night-watchman state (which protects only against violence, theft, fraud, and breach of contract) could be legitimate, even without the consent of all those to be governed. The other is that nothing more extensive than the night-watchman state is legitimate, except with the consent of all. The argument is complex, and Nozick often inserts long—and very interesting—digressions. Below I shall focus only on his core argument. I shall thus not address his discussions of Rawls' theory of justice (Ch. 7, Section 2) and other arguments attempting to justify more than the night-watchman state (Ch. 8), nor his discussion of utopias (Ch. 10).
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10355/10175
    Part of
    Central works of philosophy ; volume 5
    Part of
    Philosophy publications
    Citation
    The Twentieth Century: Quine and after. ed. John Shand. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2006. pp. 86-103.
    Collections
    • Philosophy publications (MU)

    Send Feedback
    hosted by University of Missouri Library Systems
     

     


    Send Feedback
    hosted by University of Missouri Library Systems