Nozick’s argues that if something was originally acquired justly, and later transferred justly, then it is now owned justly—and neither the government nor anyone else should be allowed to take it away.
The problem here is that many things that are owned today—money, land, natural resources—were originally acquired by force and violence, through war and colonization. Also, what do we do about "transfers" where the "buyer" wasn't properly "informed", or was coericed by desperation. What about paying wages below what the work is worth because of an overabundence of laborers? What if anything should be done about that?
How is it that people can initially come to acquire something justly and what is required for transfers of justly owned things to be just? Be sure to give your reasoning!
I struggle with the concept of 'just ownership'. It seems to me that very little if anything of what we have is ours because we "earned it". We owe so much to the efforts of others at work, school, community, society, etc. that it's hard for me to feel that I own anything. I 'possess' a lot of things thanks to the efforts of a host of other people and am thankful for their contribution on my behalf. This leads me to believe that I am responsible for these others as well, in a fundemental way, and am willing to use the vechiele of government (through taxation and regulation) to ensure that these others are also recieveing their 'just' benefits from society.
ReplyDeleteWhat right do we have to take ownership over something that really doesn't belong to us in the first place. Example, if you go to a national park there are certain places off limits to us because the government owns it. How the heck can the government own a mountain that God put there?! Planet Earth belongs to all those who inhabit it, from, man to beast to trees,etc...I have a hard time with this concept that this is mine and that is yours. Now I am not talking about materialistic things here. I agree with Mr.Swords that we owe so much to the efforts of others and that force or violence doesn't guarantee you the right to say you got this justly. This is another example of why we need intervention and just laws to right the wronged.
ReplyDeleteOwnership of parts of Earth sounds so contrived to me, even though I, too, "own" some property. Jay's comment is interesting, considering what "earn" means. I like natural consequences, so, for example, spending hours to replace a faulty water pump "earns" the right to spend less time carrying water. The idea of the value or worth of work is complex, cultural, and, many times, individual. A cook of Chinese food at Hy-Vee answered my daughter's query about the length of time and amount of effort he put into his work by telling her he earns in one day what he earned in two weeks in his native land. His gratitude keeps him happy in his hard work.
ReplyDeleteDo we own the land we buy, or are we just "stewards" of the land for the time we are here on this earth. We are responsible for taking care of it and treating it well, and we can "own" it for the time we are here if we have paid "just" money for that right and we have acquired it "justly," but there are times when this is not the case. I think of the native Americans who were removed from what they thought was their land. In some cases, they were put on reservations and allotted some land, but was that initial act just? There are many issues centered around what is really just.
ReplyDelete