5/14/15
Nozick vs Rawls
“Justly Acquiring Wealth” Robert Nozick’s utilizes the principle of justice in initial acquisition to justify and explain how a person who acquires an un-owned item, in this case being monetary wealth, and how this person can be legitimately entitled to this item. This principle depends on three background conditions: and individuals consent to trade, the item for trade had been acquired justly and legitimate, and the history of the transactions must not be unjust and if so the wrong must be rectified. The first background condition is declaring that it is pertinent to the development of a market that a party must first consent to a trade. Individuals must be in agreement or give their consent to trade an item…show more content… Let us assume that I am the sole inventor and manufacturer of a laptop that costs $200.00, assuming that there is no other complimentary items or services such as internet or Microsoft Office. There is an extremely high demand for my product and many individuals will give consent to trade me $200.00 for one laptop. Seeing as there is a very high demand for my product, I could potentially make billions of dollars making me very wealthy person. Though I would be much wealthier than most, according to Nozicks’ view, I would have justly acquired this wealth through the consent of the person purchasing the…show more content… I may justly acquire wealth if I support this condition to rectify any injustices made to the opposing party, according to Nozick. Rawls second principle of justice also be used to explain how individuals acquire wealth in a legitimate and justly manner. The beginning part of the second principle is: economic and social inequalities are to be arranged so as to make them maximally advantageous to the least advantaged in society. Rawls theory is based on his view that society is after only what is in their own personal best interest rather than society as a whole. In his theory, Rawls would much rather see wealth spread at a more even distribution rather than creating inequality amongst society even if there is equal opportunity. He also believes in maximizing the minimum level of overall wellbeing in order to create a society in which people are interested in other’s welfare rather than just their individual self-interests and