However, the original discussion by Nozick says only that the Predictor's predictions are " almost certainly " correct, and also specifies that " what you actually decide to do is not part of the explanation of why he made the prediction he made ".

Nozick says

Philosopher Robert Nozick argues that Rand's foundational argument in ethics is unsound because she does not explain why someone could not rationally prefer dying and having no values.

no: Robert Nozick

As a resolution of this apparent paradox and in defiance of Hohfeld, Robert Nozick asserted that there are no positive civil rights, only rights to property and the right of autonomy.

Nozick suggests that there is no grounds for complaint.

Robert Nozick made the point that what happens in society can not always be reduced to competitions for a coveted position ; in 1974, Nozick wrote that " life is not a race in which we all compete for a prize which someone has established " and that there is " no unified race " and there is not some one person " judging swiftness.

Wilt Chamberlain is an extremely popular basketball player in this society, and Nozick further assumes 1 million people are willing to freely give Wilt 25 cents each to watch him play basketball over the course of a season ( we assume no other transactions occur ).

Thus Nozick argues that what the Wilt Chamberlain example shows is that no patterned principle of just distribution will be compatible with liberty.

" Perhaps there is no difference in principle ," Nozick concludes, and notes that the argument could be extended to taxation on other sources besides labor.

Leff stated that Nozick built his entire book on the bald assertion that " individuals have rights which may not be violated by other individuals ", for which no justification is offered.

Moreover, they assert that what really matters for assigning ownership is whether or not property was acquired or exchanged legally ( see Robert Nozick ), which is known as the historical entitlement theory, whereas Marxists assert that there are no property rights in the means of production.

Often content to raise tantalizing philosophical possibilities and then leave judgment to the reader, Nozick was also notable for drawing from literature outside of philosophy ( e. g., economics, physics, evolutionary biology ).

If Y didn't exist, then " fair lady " would have married X ; but Y exists, so she marries Y. Nozick asks: Does suitor X have a legitimate complaint against Y on the basis of unfairness since Y didn't earn his good looks or intelligence?

Nozick then briefly considers Locke's theory of acquisition.

# Therefore Nozick, on his own grounds, should become an anarchist and then wait for the Nozickian invisible hand to operate afterward ; and

Responsiveness is defined for empirical knowledge by a reformulation of Robert Nozick ’ s tracking conditions — for example: if p were false, then S wouldn ’ t believe p — using conditional probability instead of counterfactuals.

What, Nozick asks, is the difference between seizing the second man's leisure ( which would be forced labor ) and seizing the first man's goods?

Nozick asks why the well-off would be obliged, due to their inequality and for the sake of social cooperation, to assist the worse-off and not have the worse-off accept the inequality and benefit the well-off.

Nozick, in Philosophical Explanations, advocated that, when considering the Gettier problem, the least counter-intuitive assumption we give up should be epistemic closure.

:" It is for empirical science to investigate the details of the mechanisms whereby we track, and for methodologists to devise and refine even better ( inferential ) mechanisms and methods " ( Nozick, 1981 )

** Natural rights theories, such that of John Locke or Robert Nozick, which hold that human beings have absolute, natural rights.

In response, philosophers Douglas Rasmussen and Douglas Den Uyl have argued that Nozick misstated Rand's case.

Nozick asked us to imagine that " superduper neuropsychologists " have figured out a way to stimulate a person's brain to induce pleasurable experiences.

* Robert Nozick suggests knowledge must consist of justified true belief that is " truth-tracking "— belief held in such a way that if it turned out to be false it would not have been held, and vice versa ;

On the other hand, some epistemologists, including Robert Nozick, have denied closure principles on the basis of reliabilist accounts of knowledge.

Furthermore, Rawls's idea regarding morally arbitrary natural endowments comes under fire ; Nozick argues that natural advantages that the well-off enjoy do not violate anyone's rights and therefore have a right to them, on top of which is the fact that Rawls's own proposal that inequalities be geared toward assisting the worse-off is in itself morally arbitrary.

Nozick holds a " Lockean " conception of liberty, where liberty is simply " the right to do, that which you have a right to do ".

Nozick instead argues that people who have or produce certain things have rights over them: " on an entitlement view, and distribution are not .. separate questions .. things come into the world already attached to people having entitlements over them " ( Nozick 1974: 160 ).

No one has a right to something whose realization requires certain uses of things and activities that other people have rights and entitlements over " ( Nozick 1974: 238 ).

In his later work, The Examined Life, Nozick reflects that entitlement theory's defense of people's holdings may have some problems, in that it could eventually lead to the vast majority of resources being pooled in the hands of the extremely skilled, or, through gifts and inheritance, in the hands of the extremely skilled's friends and children.

Right-libertarians like Robert Nozick, holding that self-ownership and property acquisition need not meet egalitarian standards and that they must merely avoid worsening the situation of others, have rejected left-libertarianism of the Steiner-Vallentyne school.

Fred Dretske ( 1971 ) developed an account of knowledge which he called " conclusive reasons ", revived by Robert Nozick as what he called the subjunctive or truth-tracking account ( 1981 ).

Nozick arrives at the night-watchman state of classical liberalism theory by showing that there are non-redistributive reasons for the apparently redistributive procedure of making its clients pay for the protection of others.

Neo-classical liberalism has continued into the contemporary era, with writers such as Robert Nozick.

Nozick argues that anarcho-capitalism would inevitably transform into a minarchist state, even without violating any of its own non-aggression principles, through the eventual emergence of a single locally dominant private defense and judicial agency that it is in everyone's interests to align with, because other agencies are unable to effectively compete against the advantages of the agency with majority coverage.

Nozick pumps the intuition that each of us has a reason to avoid plugging into the Experience Machine forever.

" As the most powerful applier of principles which it grants everyone the right to apply correctly ," Nozick concludes, the dominant protection agency " enforces its will, which, from the inside, it thinks is correct.

Nozick concludes that " Marxian exploitation is the exploitation of people's lack of understanding of economics.

Nozick argued against equality of opportunity on the grounds that it violates the rights of property, since the equal opportunity maxim interferes with an owner's right to do what he or she pleases with a property.

Nor does Nozick provide any means or theory whereby abuses of appropriation — acquisition of property when there is not enough and as good in common for others — should be corrected.

: The simple subtraction rule does not perfectly disentangle what the next generation has managed itself to contribute-inheriting wealth may make it easier to amass more-but it is a serviceable rule of thumb " ( Nozick 1989: 30-31 ).