Switch to: References

Citations of:

The Cambridge companion to Nozick's Anarchy, state, and utopia

New York: Cambridge University Press (2011)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Is Income Redistribution a Violation of the Categorical Imperative?Konstantin Morozov - 2024 - Omsk Scientific Bulletin. Series Society. History. Modernity 9 (3):90-98.
    In Anarchy, State, and Utopia, Robert Nozick made the argument that income redistribution violates the Kantian categorical imperative. Nozick’s retrospective enslavement argument is still used today in discussions about the moral justification of taxation. This article explicates four implicit premises of Nozick’s argument: the self-ownership principle, its fullness, the absence of restrictions on the appropriation of natural resources, and the absence of restrictions on the distribution of the fruits of cooperation. Without additional justification for each of these premises, Nozick’s argument (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • I—Racial Justice.Charles W. Mills - 2018 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 92 (1):69-89.
    ‘Racial justice’ is a term widely used in everyday discourse, but little explored in philosophy. In this essay, I look at racial justice as a concept, trying to bring out its complexities, and urging a greater engagement by mainstream political philosophers with the issues that it raises. After comparing it to other varieties of group justice and injustice, I periodize racial injustice, relate it to European expansionism and argue that a modified Rawlsianism relying on a different version of the thought (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • The demandingness of Nozick’s ‘Lockean’ proviso.Josh Milburn - 2016 - European Journal of Political Theory 15 (3):276-292.
    Interpreters of Robert Nozick’s political philosophy fall into two broad groups concerning his application of the ‘Lockean proviso’. Some read his argument in an undemanding way: individual instances of ownership which make people worse off than they would have been in a world without any ownership are unjust. Others read the argument in a demanding way: individual instances of ownership which make people worse off than they would have been in a world without that particular ownership are unjust. While I (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations