Abstract

In his book "Anarchy, State and Utopia", Robert Nozick argues for an entitlement theory of justice and against distributive justice. This essay tries to defend the first claim without accepting the second one, showing, firstly, how it is possible (against Nozick) to apply a "patterned" principle of justice in acquisitions of unappropriated resources; and, secondly, how either the content of principle of justice in acquisitions or the content of principle of justice in transfers should be different from those suggested in Nozick's theory. This leads to the conclusion that an egalitarian entitlement theory of justice is possible and defensible against Nozick's anti-egalitarian stands.