Libertarianism And Utilitarianism

2203 Words5 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: libertarian vs utilitarianism

Amanda Joy PHI 100 Robert King Prelim #2 1) In this statement, “Any just society must ensure that whatever the property ownership arrangement in that society, they enable all people to meet their needs,” both the libertarianism and utilitarianism reject this egalitarian criterion of a just society. The libertarians would reject this claim due to the fact that they feel that a just society needs to protect the liberty and freedom of each individual to pursue his or her end desires. The Libertarian view requires them to be free to choose their own ends and free to pursue them without interference from others. Libertarians feel strongly that each person should have the same freedom to pursue his chosen ends and that each person is obligated to hold back from interfering with others in their freedom to pursue their ends. This is necessary to protect each individual's freedom. The Libertarians feel that having certain rights, which protect his or her liberty, are necessary to pursue a beautiful kind of life. Libertarians have three main requirements: life, liberty, and property. Property, in their opinion does not mean only real estate; it includes anything that you can declare your own. Property can include clothing, your car, your jewelry, your books and papers. The right of property is not the right to take it from others; this would interfere with their property rights. It is rather the right to work for it, to obtain non-coercively the money or services which you can present in voluntary exchanges. For example, depriving people of property is depriving them of the means by which they live, the freedom of the individual citizen to do what he wishes with his own life and to plan for the future. Without the right to prop... ... middle of paper ... ...egalitarian theory of justice? The main idea behind his theory is that all social primary goods of liberty and opportunity, income and wealth, must be distributed equally. The egalitarian way of thinking is simply that any situation must be equal, equally talented, equally motivated and therefore have equal life prospects. It requires a society that believes and lives by equality and more respect. That is exactly what Rawls has been attempting to demonstrate by using the veil of ignorance, the thought-experiment. All of these factors were demonstrating a main principle that Rawls wants people to seek the right to utilize their own talents without being worried about what others are going to think or feel about them; either they are good or bad. Rawls is suggesting that this is done by sharing one another’s fate, by doing this it will create a more equal society.

Show More
Related

  • Searle’s Argument against Free Will

    1849 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...is pretty solid. The most accessible way to argue against it is to argue against materialism. Arguing against materialism with a dualist view is only partially successful because it entails that there still is a material self that is determined which can’t be free in the libertarian sense. The only way to successfully unravel the argument is with an idealist—mind only—substance view. It you viewed humans in this way, humans would not be determined and able to have free will (even in the libertarian sense!) Even more daring would be trying to reject determinism and accept libertarian freedom using a material viewpoint. Although it is possible, it leads to quite a conflicting view. However, the view that makes the most sense is the argument. This seemingly valid argument says that humans are materials which make them determined which disallows their freedom.

    Read More

  • Libertarianism In Ground Hogs Day

    1683 Words  | 4 Pages

    Libertarianism is a political philosophy that upholds free will as its pivotal objective. As a natural law, there are no events that happen by chance, each event is derived from a cause that led to a specific effect. The law of cause and effect is one of the most universal and most certain of all laws. Ted sider says “humans and humans alone transcend the laws of nature; they are free.” Only humans are dismissed from the effects of a cause when it comes to Free will. I believe it is flawed to assume that we are the only exception to a natural law of our universe. Something as complex as our brains, such as the universe for example, did not create itself, or the phenomenon’s that occur in it. We know that in our solar system events all derive from a specific cause and we also know that everything in our universe is made up of the same matter, and we are all connected energetically. With that being said, I think it is absurd to believe that humans transcend the most established law of

    Read More

  • Rawls Theory Of Justice

    3346 Words  | 7 Pages

    John Rawls most famous work, A Theory of Justice deals with a complex system of rules and principles. It introduces principles of justice to the world, principles which Rawls argues, are meant to create and strengthen equality while remove the inequality which exists within society. These principles are both meant as standalone laws and regulations but they can be joined as well. The main function of the first principle is to ensure the liberty of every individual while the second principle is meant to be the force for the removal of inequality through what Rawls calls distributive justice.

    Read More

  • Theory Of Property In John Locke's Second Treatise Of Government

    1562 Words  | 4 Pages

    First, Locke believes that everyone has the opportunity to cultivate the land that they own, which ideally is a proportionate share of the surrounding environment, and nothing more (Locke, Sec. 36). Locke’s theory of property is not just relative to physical entities, it can be an intellectual entity as well. An individual may have certain experiences and knowledge, develop theories and come to their own conclusions. Publishing said works are seen as property in the eyes of Locke as well. Another strength would be the logic of Locke’s argument, if you input your labour, that commodity becomes your own. Truth of this can be seen in section 33 of Locke’s Second Treatise of Civil Government, when Locke suggests that labour increases the value of land exponentially because when people own land themselves, they are more likely to increase the productivity of that land. According to Locke, the true value of land does not stem from the land, rather the labour invested in it. Locke’s theory however, does not take into account the processes in which someone becomes an owner. One of the main stances Locke outlines in his theory of property is that he equates property to being a natural right. Locke deems the right to private property to be equally important as life and liberty, however they cannot be

    Read More

  • Libertarianism

    1135 Words  | 3 Pages

    To achieve this, Campbell first sets out the two pre-suppositions necessary to the Libertarian argument. Firstly, he defines which kind of freedom he is discussing when he speaks of free will. Campbell characterizes “the freedom at issue” as one that predominantly concerns a person’s inner acts and decisions (377). A person’s observable acts are important only as they show an inner “life of choice”(377). Therefore the moral freedom assumed is that freedom which concerns inner acts.

    Read More

  • Exploring the Sources and Dimensions of Social Ethics

    1860 Words  | 4 Pages

    It gives us rights to be who we want to be or do what we want to do. As much as society gives us liberty, but it doesn’t give us freedom. There’s a difference between freedom and liberty. Freedom is the ability to do whatever pleases the person, for example, when a person wants to go outside and walk in the streets naked but he can’t or even allowed to because he has liberty not freedom. Liberty gives people the right to practice freedom but in limit. So when this person gets arrested for walking outside naked is called liberty, he doesn’t have the right to go outside his house naked. Therefore, you have the ability to do whatever you want inside your own house but not outside. Freedom is you can do whatever you want to yourself but not others. Freedoms end when you interfere someone else’s freedom. For example, you are free to smoke, until you encounter my freedom not to inhale your

    Read More

  • Intellectual Property Rights Case Study

    1187 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the words of the Libertarian Party of Canada, Libertarians want “less government, lower taxes, more freedom”. Freedom is used as a broad term, implying a quest for freedom of information as well as individual freedom as citizens. Libertarians have some interesting views on media ownership and copyright laws. They believe in freedom of information for all, small government, and are generally anti-monopoly. Spreading information and power between citizens is the only sure way to benefit the whole world. Concentrated power will be used only to benefit those in power, so if power was given to the people, laws could benefit the people instead of the elite. Libertarians are seemingly conflicted over the idea of intellectual property. If someone makes something clever and unique that they worked on for years, they should have ownership of it, but since that...

    Read More

  • Locke State Of Nature Analysis

    1424 Words  | 3 Pages

    We can say that Locke conceived all the natural rights as things which an individual brings with him from birth, and consequently as indefeasible or inviolable claims upon both society and government. Such claims can never be justly set aside, since society itself exists to protect them; they can be regulated only to the extent that is necessary to give them effective protection. In other words, the “life, liberty and estate” of one person can be limited only to make effective the equally valid claims of another person to the same right.

    Read More

  • John Locke Natural Rights Analysis

    1343 Words  | 3 Pages

    According to John Locke everyone has natural rights. John Locke came up with natural rights, by thinking about what they could be for a long and vigorous time. Locke said that natural rights are “life, health, liberty, and possessions” (9). Life is something that no one can take away from anyone. Locke said, “no ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possession” (9). Life is not an absolute right. An example of this is if there was a train full of ten thousand people about to hit a rock, and you are by the switch that could save the ten thousand people, but if you use the switch you are killing a twelve-year-old girl on the other track. Liberty is doing what ever someone wants to do, and they can’t be punished for

    Read More

  • Theory Of Justice In John Rawls's Theory Of Justice

    2303 Words  | 5 Pages

    John Rawls’ Theory of Justice attempts to establish a fair and reasonable social account of social justice. To do this, he discusses two fundamental principles of justice, which if implemented into society, would guarantee a just and fair way of life. Rawls is mostly concerned with the social good (what is good and just), and his aim with the Theory of Justice is to provide a way that society could be one that is fair and just, while taking into consideration, a person’s primary goods (rights and liberties, opportunities, income and wealth, and the social bases of self-respect). The usage of these principles will lead to an acceptable basis of self-respect. That saying, if the two principles are fair and just, then the final primary good,

    Read More

  • An Ideal Society in John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice

    535 Words  | 2 Pages

    John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice presents an ideal society based on several simple principles. While the system Rawls suggests is well constructed, it is not without its flaws. I will now attempt to explain Rawls’ idea of Justice as Fairness and explain where the system fails.

    Read More

  • Comparing John Locke, John Stuart Mill, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau

    2030 Words  | 5 Pages

    In order to examine how each thinker views man and the freedom he should have in a political society, it is necessary to define freedom or liberty from each philosopher’s perspective. John Locke states his belief that all men exist in "a state of perfect freedom to order their actions and dispose of their possessions and person as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave or depending upon the will of any other man." (Ebenstein 373) Locke believes that man exists in a state of nature and thus exists in a state of uncontrollable liberty, which has only the law of nature, or reason, to restrict it. (Ebenstein 374) However, Locke does state that man does not have the license to destroy himself or any other creature in his possession unless a legitimate purpose requires it. Locke emphasizes the ability and opportunity to own and profit from property as necessary for being free.

    Read More

  • Distributive Justice By Robert Nozick And John Rawls

    1255 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...e achieved when the Liberty and Difference Principle are enacted with the veil of ignorance. On the contrary, Nozick argues that Rawls’s theory is exactly the sort of patterned principle that infringes upon individual liberty. As an alternative, Nozick provides his unpatterned principle as the ideal distribution of goods in a society. To me, Rawls’s argues his theory in a manner where his principles of justice are not only difficult to achieve, but ultimately are exceedingly deficient in providing general utility. The veil of ignorance has proved to be almost impossible as well as unethical. The Difference Principle in itself is unable to justly distribute property since it clearly violates an individual’s liberty. Since Rawls’s method of distributive justice is rendered unreasonable and inefficient, it leaves us with a clear answer derived from two disjunctions.

    Read More

  • John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice

    959 Words  | 2 Pages

    John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice holds that a rational, mutually disinterested individual in the Original Position and given the task of establishing societal rules to maximise their own happiness throughout life, is liable to choose as their principles of justice a) guaranteed fundamental liberties and b) the nullification of social and economic disparities by universal equality of opportunities, which are to be of greatest benefit to the least advantaged members of society , . Rawls’ system of societal creation has both strengths and weaknesses, but is ultimately sound.

    Read More

  • Similarities Between Liberalism And Fascism

    1865 Words  | 4 Pages

    Locke (1995) claims that it is the living under the government which provides freedom through the use rules, no restraint besides the law, and free from arbitrary power. Liberalism tends to support the idea of limiting constitution government and their power. It was liberal thinkers James Madison and Baron de Montesquieu that designed the idea of the separation of powers, to equally distribute the power the government has (Young 2002). This then causes it to help to ensure that there are individual freedom, rights and that individuals have autonomy. Liberals tend to be suspicious of the government and the power that they possess which can be used to limit an individual and their freedom. By restricting the government, it makes sure that they are not using their power to target citizens and to constrain their liberty. Friedrich von Hayek (1960) debated for the rule of law, where individuals under this law can make choices and act upon them without constraint. With a rule of law and the separation of powers, it ensures that no single person can rule over the citizens and rob them of their freedom. Unless, of course, their state is a form of fascism to which there is an absolute power leadership. Although, while more modern forms of liberalism support the restrictions placed on governments they are still supportive of the continued use of services provided to ensure equal rights and freedom (Young 2002). Having personal liberty would be pointless if they lacked the supplies to be able to benefit from having these rights. Locke (1960) vowed that if a government truly breaches an individuals’ rights and liberty, these individuals may legitimately rebel against the government. Hence why liberalism rejects the idea of an absolute rule. As one of the main concepts of liberalism is freedom, there is no way they would have an absolute

    Read More

More about Libertarianism And Utilitarianism

Open Document