Anarquía, Estado y Utopía has ratings and reviews. Con este libro, Robert Nozick se convirtió en el principal defensor teórico del liberalismo en las . Tratado acerca de la funcion del Estado moderno, en el que se exponen algunas tesis para la posible creacion de un nuevo Estado minimo, asi como una. Anarquia, Estado y Utopia by Robert Nozick, , available at Book Depository with free delivery worldwide.

Author: Zolosida Aragami
Country: Denmark
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: History
Published (Last): 11 March 2012
Pages: 336
PDF File Size: 1.1 Mb
ePub File Size: 8.21 Mb
ISBN: 242-5-94189-859-7
Downloads: 16863
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Zulumuro

This may be a powerful argument for the best form of government. Very thought provoking book. These are the kinds of questions that the author addresses in the book, and some are left solely for consideration by the reader.

Finally, there will be some specification of a rule of necessity which requires one not to use more in self-defense than is necessary to repel the attack. I ended up running out of highlighter in the last part of the book because so many juicy bits required annotation!

When an amount A in addition to f H is expended in self-defense, the punishment which later may be inflicted is reduced by that amount and becomes r X H – A. In those views, a distribution of property is viewed as if all property in a society is a common resource pool to which anybody has a property right. He was educated at Columbia A. This is an extremely heavy piece of libertarian political philosophy. Nozick is very clever and a pleasure to read.

Nozick claims, for example, that he set out to disprove point 1 and that he surprised himself when he couldn’t. If you really think Rawls has anarqiua the last word on political philosophy, then it might be robrrt to read this book.

In this view, somebody as a property right if the property is acquired in a just way. Another huge problem is that Nozick cannot draw any limits that his state may not pass in the pursuit of security.

It won the U. Assume that differing-minded people can just geographically separate from one another! One of the best things about him is how he is fairly up front with the weak points of his theory.

Anarquia, Estado y Utopia

And again, game-theoretic analysis comes into play, although not from a rigorous mathematical standpoint. If there was a source any given source no doubt it would most likely be arbitrary in its absoluteness. And at least half of them are there not to illustrate, but mainly to entertain.


The master has a group of slave, and he decides how things are to be allocated among them on nice grounds, taking into account their needs, merit, and so on.

Even if I stipulate the empirical question of natural monopoly, his argument for the transition sounded like non sequitur to me. So this book does not flow in a straight line. In appreciation of your useful contributions nozixk discussion, the 10, allow you to vote if they are deadlocked; they commit themselve3s to this procedure.

In the eventuality that they divide evenly on some issue, 5, for and 5, against, they look at your ballot and count it in. His discription of destributive justice is particularly fascinating.

I can sometimes blame them for their ignorance, when they dress themselves as intellectuals but don’t bother to actually read the books outlining the theories they are criticizing.

You don’t have to write a metaphysical treatise first, of course, but at the very least you could not abandon metaphysics. They then go off to vote to decide upon policies covering the vast range of their powers. That is because the million people freely consented to give their 1 euro to watch Messi’s talent, even though it has nothing to do with hard-work.

The state cannot and will not interfere, stopping us from giving Messi 1 euro for his talent even though that would create an uneven distribution of goods. I personally have only read excerpts. So there you have it, I fully admit that whole sections of this book went over my head. This would allow for every voluntary exchange except for those that increase the wealth of the richest or decrease the wealth of the poorest.

But dear God, it ma This is a work of political philosophy arguing for minimal government, the libertarian counterpart and answer to the liberal John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice. And how can you not love a book with the central thesis: If you want to attempt it, I think it is worth your time. Robert Nozick is at his best as a critic, and the best part of this book is the critical part. He could handle extremely abstract concepts. A few years subsequent to the release of Anarchy, State, and Utopiathe political philosophy scene had been awestruck with the release of John Rawls ‘ A Theory of Justice.


Anarquía, estado y utopía – Robert Nozick – Google Books

The second part shows that no state more extensive than the minimal state is just If you really think Rawls has said the last word on political philosophy, then it might be time to read this book. Probably, there never will be. To ask other readers questions about Anarchy, State, and Utopiaplease sign up. The rest of the time is their own. So it’s a bit of a natural monopoly locally and it’s not something too distasteful. This is the first step in preparation to reading the text. Under this thought experiment, you don’t know upfront if you’ll be the guy who gets given the good deal or the crappy deal, so you take it easy on the guys at the bottom of the distribution.

But I’m glad I read it. Most of the rest of my review will be critical, but I’d like to at least mention some of my favorites of Nozick’s argum Nozick is very clever and a pleasure to read.

Nozick defends a laissez-faire form of distribution and argues that any form of redistribution, through taxation and entitlement programs, violates an absolute right to property and amounts nkzick forced labor.

Sep 18, Robbie Leslie rated it it was amazing. In Nozicks view, a state rpbert to consist of several communities which separately pursue their own utopia, without forcing anything onto the other communities. Though still not having the vote, you are at liberty and are given the right to enter into discussion of the 10, to try to persuade them to adopt various policies and to treat you and themselves in a certain way.

I sort of wonder whether the whole book is esatdo kind of trolling exercise, an insincere set of political provocations from someone happily free!