 |
| Replies |
 Ann (main path) |
 Ayesha |
Ann |
 Fred |
 Fred |
| On Property |
| Dee Speaking
|
 Let's
go back to the state of nature and the Lockean proviso.
It may be that some version of the Lockean proviso must
be contained in a philosophical theory of property.
Nozick thought so, and he was a pretty solid libertarian
with a strong philosophical bent. I prefer Roger Pilon's
view, but maybe Nozick is correct. I'm not sure.Nozick came to the conclusion that what really mattered was not so much that "enough, and as good" was left for people to use or appropriate, but that people were not made worse off by the appropriations of others. At that point we need to think about all the benefits of private property -- higher productivity for example. This is relevant not because Nozick was trying to construct a utilitarian justification for property, but because we need to show that no one is left worse off by allowing some to appropriate various resources. Nozick agreed that there were cases where property rights were made void by unusual circumstances -- if I claim that the only well in a desert is mine, for example. In that case my appropriation does leave others worse off. But in most cases it doesn't. |
|
|
||
| Ariadne's Home | Contact Ariadne at: | Property Home |
| Property Bibliography |  |
Property Contents |
|
|
||