Wilt Chamberlain Redux: Thinking Clearly about Externalities and the Promises of Justice

Reason Papers 39 (2):90-114 (2018)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Gordon Barnes accuses Robert Nozick and Eric Mack of neglecting, in two ways, the practical, empirical questions relevant to justice in the real world.1 He thinks these omissions show that the argument behind the Wilt Chamberlain example—which Nozick famously made in his seminal Anarchy, State, and Utopia—fails. As a result, he suggests that libertarians should concede that this argument fails. In this article, we show that Barnes’s key arguments hinge on misunderstandings of, or failures to notice, key aspects of the entitlement theory that undergirds Nozick’s and Mack’s work. Once the theory is properly understood, Barnes’s challenges fail to undermine the Chamberlain example, in particular, and the entitlement theory, in general.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
RODWCR
Revision history
Archival date: 2018-02-05
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2018-02-05

Total downloads
43 ( #25,836 of 33,611 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
20 ( #15,428 of 33,611 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.