Skip to main content

Stability and Utopia; A Critique of Nozick’s Framework Argument

  • Chapter
  • 446 Accesses

Abstract

It is said that a critic of Darwin’s The Origin of Species dismissed the book by observing: ‘What is good in it is not new and what is new in it is not good’. The remark did a terrible injustice to Darwin’s theory of evolution. Now, however, there seems to be a theory to which it can be accurately applied. I refer to Nozick’s theory of the minimal state as a framework for Utopia.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Nozick, Anarchy, State, and Utopia (New York: Basic Books, 1974), p. 297. Examples of other writers who questioned the ability of the night-watchman state to win wide support would be Rousseau (The Social Contract and The Second Discourse), Marx (The Jewish Question), Hegel (The Philosophy of Right), and Michael Walzer (Obligations).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America (New York: Random House, Vintage Books, 1945), 1:3.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Good brief summaries of Tocqueville’s ideas can be found in Raymond Aron’s Main Currents in Sociological Thought, vol. 1, Montesquieu, Comte, Marx, Tocqueville, the Sociologists, and the Revolution of 1848 (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday & Co., 1968)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Marvin Zetterbaum’s ‘Alexis de Tocqueville’, in History of Political Thought, ed. Leo Strauss and Joseph Cropsey (Chicago: Rand McNally & Co., 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  5. See G. W. F. Hegel, The Philosophy of Right, trans. T. M. Knox (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965), part 2

    Google Scholar 

  6. See The Federalist Papers, ed. Andrew Hacker (New York: Washington Square Press, 1972), esp. nos. 10 and 52.

    Google Scholar 

  7. See John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1971), p. 527.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 1991 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Fowler, M. (1991). Stability and Utopia; A Critique of Nozick’s Framework Argument. In: Corlett, J.A. (eds) Equality and Liberty. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-21763-2_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics