prior probability

Nozick devotes the last three subsections of Chapter 8 (pp. 268-275) to two interwoven tasks: (1) reiterating his conception of a minimal state, and (2) responding to various justifications made in favor of a more extensive state. Recall that, for Nozick, the ideal state is the minimal state, i.e. one that is limited to enforcing contracts, prohibiting fraud and force, and punishing theft. Nevertheless, Nozick identifies two different arguments in favor of a more extensive state. One is that economic equality (via some form of compulsory redistribution) is necessary in order to promote political equality (the political equality argument). The other is that people should have a voice over decisions that affect them (the voice argument). Nozick debunks and discredits both of these arguments as follows: Continue reading →

Nozick begins the eighth section of Chapter 8 of ASU (pp. 265-268) by making a strong case in favor of compulsory redistribution! (Yes, you heard that right. Again, I will summarize Nozick’s argument in my own words.) Let’s assume that I am an altruist and that I want to contribute to a good cause, such as helping the poor. Despite my altruistic inclination, there are two reasons why I may not end up making any charitable contributions. One is the free rider problem. Simply put, why should I make any charitable contributions if everyone else is already contributing to my favorite causes? The other reason is fear of being exploited. That is, I might be more than willing to contribute $n to help the poor, but only if a sufficient number of other individuals were also contributing to my cause; otherwise, I might feel like a sucker if I am the only one giving. Continue reading →

Nozick takes a short detour in the seventh section of Chapter 8 of ASU (pp. 262-265), where he makes a conjecture about the structure of rights to engage in relationships with others. At one point, Nozick states (p. 264): “Rights to engage in relationships and transactions have hooks on them, which must attach to the corresponding hook of another’s right that comes out to meet theirs.” Moreover, according to Nozick (ibid., emphasis in original): “Adults normally will have the right to [establish] a relationship with any other consenting adult who has this right, but the right may be forfeited in punishment for wrongful acts.” This conjecture, however, generates a number of intractable problems: Continue reading →

Nozick accomplishes two tasks in the sixth subsection of Chapter 8 (pp. 253-262). First, he explains why so few business firms are owned or run by workers. But more importantly, he single-handedly demolishes Marxian economic theory. As usual, I will summarize Nozick’s argument in my own words. To begin with, the reason why so few business firms are worker-owned is because of the risks of investment and production, or as Nozick puts it (p. 255, emphasis in original): “It’s risky starting a new firm.” Although Nozick fails to distinguish between risk and uncertainty (see chart below), his larger point is well taken. In Nozick’s words (ibid.): “Some persons don’t want to run these risks of investing or backing new ventures, or starting new ventures themselves. Capitalist society allows the separation and bearing of these risks from other activities.” In other words, one virtue of open markets is that they allow persons to avoid or assume as much or as little business risk as they wish, depending on one’s aversion to or preference for such risk. Continue reading →

Nozick poses a pair of related questions in the next two subsections of Chapter 8 of ASU (pp. 246-253) regarding the organization of business firms. One question is, How could we incentivize business firm to provide more opportunities for meaningful and satisfying work to its employees? The other is, Why aren’t more firms owned or controlled by their employees? These questions are all the more pressing today given recent developments, including David Graeber’s recent critique of bullshit jobs, the Starbucks “ethical sourcing” controversy, and the proliferation of slave labor camps in China (the video below, for example, features Dejian Zeng, an NYU grad student who worked undercover in a Chinese factory, spending 12 hours a day attaching one screw to iPhones). Continue reading →

Nozick explores a number of intriguing questions in the third subsection of Chapter 8 of ASU (pp. 239-246). Why do people feel envy? What is the source of this emotion? And what is the best way of reducing the incidence of envy? I shall succinctly summarize Nozick’s argument in my own words as follows: Continue reading →

Nozick devotes the next subsection of Chapter 8 (pp. 235-238) to attacking the concept of equality of opportunity. But before we proceed any further, I must make a confession. Although I agree 99% with Nozick’s criticism of equality of outcomes, I was at first aghast by Nozick’s negative appraisal of equality of opportunity. I mean, for goodness’ sake, who can be against the ideal of equal opportunity? Nevertheless, I ended up changing my mind about this after I digested Nozick’s no-hold-barred condemnation of this concept. It turns out that equality of opportunity is not only an impossible goal; it is also a dangerous one. Continue reading →

Nozick begins Chapter 8 by addressing the issue of income inequality and by pointing out an embarrassing gap in the scholarly and popular literature on this subject. According to Nozick, scholars who defend equality as a desirable normative goal are committing a version of the ipse dixit fallacy. They are simply asserting without argument their conclusion. Continue reading →

After defending his entitlement theory of justice and engaging in intellectual combat with John Rawls in Chapter 7 of Anarchy, State, and Utopia (ASU), Nozick will explore other theories of equality in Chapter 8. But before we jump into this chapter, let’s take a look at its overall structure and organization. Chapter 8 is titled “Equality, Envy, Exploitation, Etc.” and poses the following practical and philosophical question: What, if anything, should we do about income inequality? The chapter is divided into eleven separate subsections as follows:

• Equality (pp. 232-235)
• Equality of opportunity (pp. 235-238)
• Self-esteem and envy (pp. 239-246)
• Meaningful work (pp. 246-250)
• Workers’ control (pp. 250-253)
• Marxian exploitation (pp. 253-262)
• Voluntary exchange (pp. 262-265)
• Philanthropy (pp. 265-268)
• Having a way over what affects you (pp. 268-271)
• The nonneutral state (pp. 271-274)
• How redistribution operates (pp. 274-275)

In our view, Chapter 8 is well worth reading or re-reading, as the case may be, for it is the most timely and relevant part of this book in this age of global markets and gross income inequality …