What do you think?
Rate this book
Reading Nozick: Essays on Anarchy, State, and Utopia
- GenresPhilosophyPolitics
418 pages, Paperback
Published January 1, 1981
4 people are currently reading
72 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
March 7, 2026
It's funny that even when I can follow the intricate arguments put forth by these writers, what resonated most was the occasional use of the words fair and unfair. These papers are all worth reading but I'm not sure why Nozick's paper on Ayn Rand and a response by Uyl and Rasmussen is included. They just don't seem so relevant to Anarchy, State and Utopia.
Robert Paul Wolff writes that he has two reactions to Nozick's book: one positive but the other that he finds such books creepy. He dislikes the application of indifference curves, utility theory, game theory, and rational choice models into spheres of life heretofore untouched by economic analysis. It seems that Locke's rationale for the state introduces an economic element right from the get-go: "mutual preservation of their lives, liberties, and estates." The other famous quote of course refers to Locke's labor-mixing theory which legitimizes a man's property: Whoever "appropriates land to himself by his labour, does not lessen but increase the common stock of mankind." If in one of the seminal books justifying the modern state we find critical references to economic concepts, it seems to me any attempt to use the tools of economic analysis to explain the state and (at least some of the) ethics within it is fully justified, even if you don't believe Nozick succeeded.
The last chapter by Israel M. Kirzner, "Entrepreneurship, Entitlement, and Economic Justice," is in fact a very deft intertwining of morality and market exchange based on various, often overlooked, ways in which economic value is created by exchanges often thought of as unjust. He also explores the role of error in exchanges, really a very refreshing view of markets.
Robert Paul Wolff writes that he has two reactions to Nozick's book: one positive but the other that he finds such books creepy. He dislikes the application of indifference curves, utility theory, game theory, and rational choice models into spheres of life heretofore untouched by economic analysis. It seems that Locke's rationale for the state introduces an economic element right from the get-go: "mutual preservation of their lives, liberties, and estates." The other famous quote of course refers to Locke's labor-mixing theory which legitimizes a man's property: Whoever "appropriates land to himself by his labour, does not lessen but increase the common stock of mankind." If in one of the seminal books justifying the modern state we find critical references to economic concepts, it seems to me any attempt to use the tools of economic analysis to explain the state and (at least some of the) ethics within it is fully justified, even if you don't believe Nozick succeeded.
The last chapter by Israel M. Kirzner, "Entrepreneurship, Entitlement, and Economic Justice," is in fact a very deft intertwining of morality and market exchange based on various, often overlooked, ways in which economic value is created by exchanges often thought of as unjust. He also explores the role of error in exchanges, really a very refreshing view of markets.
August 15, 2014
A worthy collection of articles, both critical and sympathetic, about Nozick's "Anarchy, State & Utopia". It features very noteworthy philosophers (some of the best, in fact): Peter Singer, Samuel Scheffler, Thomas Scanlon, Hillel Steiner...
These were written at the time of the original publication of Nozick's now-classic book, and it is clear it was immediately seen as such, even though his basic position - and the "entitlement theory" - gets pummeled pretty heavily.
It remains one of the great mysteries why Nozick never deigned to reply in detail to his fierce but worthy critics.
Maybe an updated "2.0" version of Nozick's theory might have become a true challenger to Rawls's hegemony. As it is, Nozick's theory remains academically marginalized and clearly flawed, but still one of the most brilliant and fruitful attempts of the 20th Century at a defence of free market capitalism.
These were written at the time of the original publication of Nozick's now-classic book, and it is clear it was immediately seen as such, even though his basic position - and the "entitlement theory" - gets pummeled pretty heavily.
It remains one of the great mysteries why Nozick never deigned to reply in detail to his fierce but worthy critics.
Maybe an updated "2.0" version of Nozick's theory might have become a true challenger to Rawls's hegemony. As it is, Nozick's theory remains academically marginalized and clearly flawed, but still one of the most brilliant and fruitful attempts of the 20th Century at a defence of free market capitalism.
Read
September 23, 2010"Reading Nozick: Essays on Anarchy, State and Utopia by Jeffrey Paul (1982)"
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews