distributive justice, position of John Rawls,Robert Nozick, Milton Friedman, James Donaldson(comparing the relationship of state

Pages 4 (1004 words)
Download 0
Name: Tutor: Course: Date: Distributive Justice 1. The concept of distributive justice refers to the sets of principles that explain the course of justice, during the distribution of some good or bad amongst different people. It refers to the nature of the allocation of goods within the society, in a socially just way.


According to Rawls, distributive justice serves to ensure that all is done in a manner that guarantees equality for all; nothing should be done to damage or hurt another person. The principles of the model include that every demographic group should be offered access to the same goods and treatment as all others, where for instance, the poor receive the same healthcare services as the wealthy. Further, the advocates of this model hold that there is a need to change the outlook of our institutions, so as to ensure that they help in improving the lives of the disadvantaged within the community (Lamont, 43). On the other hand, Nozick views that distributive justice would be fair, in the case that it defined three main areas, including the ways that properties not owned by anyone can be acquired; the transfer of goods from one person to the other, and the course of rectifying past injustices – which arose from the violations of acquisition and transfer of goods (Wolff 57). Nozick views that the transfer, acquisition and the rectification of ownership should not necessarily be patterned to anything else. For example, he states that a gift or things acquired by chance can be duly owned and warranted. The distribution of property is fair, as long as it is done according to the rules of acquisition, rectification and transfer. ...
Download paper
Not exactly what you need?