Serão sólidos os argumentos de Nozick em favor do estado mínimo?
| Ano de defesa: | 2017 |
|---|---|
| Autor(a) principal: | |
| Orientador(a): | |
| Banca de defesa: | |
| Tipo de documento: | Dissertação |
| Tipo de acesso: | Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: | por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais
UFMG |
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Não Informado pela instituição
|
| Departamento: |
Não Informado pela instituição
|
| País: |
Não Informado pela instituição
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: | |
| Link de acesso: | http://hdl.handle.net/1843/BUOS-B8AHBV |
Resumo: | In 1974, the philosopher Robert Nozick published Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Since then, this modern classic of political philosophy has provoked much debate. In the book, Nozicks main task is to advocate that the minimal state is the only morally acceptable. According to him, redistributive states violate individual property rights and must be rejected. The main parts of Nozicks argument are the self-ownership thesis and the entitlement theory. According to the thesis, people are, in the strongest possible sense, self-owners. The entitlement theory, on its turn, governs the rules of initial acquisition, transfer, and rectification of property. In this dissertation, I offer a detailed examination of these points. Finally, I analyze Nozick's defense of the minimal state as a framework for different utopias. According to him, the minimal state is a model from which different conceptions of the good life can be lived by. This fact, he argues, makes it inspiring. |