"</ ref > Although compatibilism, the view that determinism and free will are not logically incompatible, is the most popular position on free will amongst professional philosophers, metaphysical libertarianism is discussed, though not necessarily endorsed, by several philosophers, such as Peter van Inwagen, Robert Kane, Robert Nozick, Carl Ginet, Hugh McCann, Harry Frankfurt, Alfred Mele, Roderick Chisholm, Daniel Dennett, Timothy O ' Connor, Derk Pereboom and Galen Strawson.

Patterns of Discovery ( 1958 ) is later cited by the philosopher Robert Nozick in his ( 1974 ) work of Political Philosophy, Anarchy, State, and Utopia in order to lend support to his view of " understanding the political realm in terms of the nonpolitical ," as a way of understanding the " whole political realm.

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 ).

Due to certain counterexamples that could otherwise be raised against these counterfactual conditions, Nozick specified that:

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 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.

In opposition to A Theory of Justice by John Rawls, and in debate with Michael Walzer, Nozick argues in favor of a minimal state, " limited to the narrow functions of protection against force, theft, fraud, enforcement of contracts, and so on.

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 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.

" Nozick suggested, as a critique of Rawls and utilitarianism, that the sacrosanctity of life made property rights non-negotiable, such that an individual's personal liberty made state policies of redistribution illegitimate.

Nozick created the thought experiment of the " utility monster " to show that average utilitarianism could lead to a situation where the needs of the vast majority were sacrificed for one individual.

Nozick appealed to the Kantian idea that people should be treated as ends ( what he termed ' separateness of persons '), not merely as a means to some other end.

To support the idea of the minimal state, Nozick presents an argument that illustrates how the minimalist state arises naturally from anarchy and how any expansion of state power past this minimalist threshold is unjustified.

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 used this idea to form his Lockean Proviso which governs the initial acquisition of property in a society.

According to Stephen Metcalf, Nozick expresses serious misgivings about capitalist libertarianism, going so far as to reject much of the foundations of the theory on the grounds that personal freedom can sometimes only be fully actualized via a collectivist politics and that wealth is at times justly redistributed via taxation to protect the freedom of the many from the potential tyranny of an overly selfish and powerful few.

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 ".

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.

An argument similar to D ' Souza's was raised by Nozick in Anarchy, State, and Utopia, who wrote that the only way to achieve equality of opportunity was " directly worsening the situations of those more favored with opportunity, or by improving the situation of those less well-favored.

Unusually for a law professor without a graduate degree in philosophy, he has published significant work in moral and political theory only indirectly related to the law ; Right and Wrong, for instance is an impressive general statement of a Kantian position in ethics with affinities with the work of Thomas Nagel, John Rawls, and Robert Nozick.

Nozick believes that if the world were wholly just, only the first two principles would be needed, as " the following inductive definition would exhaustively cover the subject of justice in holdings ":

Philosophers in moral theory and rhetoric had taken defeasibility largely for granted when American epistemologists rediscovered Wittgenstein's thinking on the subject: John Ladd, Roderick Chisholm, Roderick Firth, Ernest Sosa, Robert Nozick, and John L. Pollock all began writing with new conviction about how appearance as red was only a defeasible reason for believing something to be red.

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.

Nozick believed that the third subjunctive condition served to address cases of the sort described by Gettier.

Nozick further claims this condition addresses a case of the sort described by D. M. Armstrong: A father believes his son innocent of committing a particular crime, both because of faith in his son and ( now ) because he has seen presented in the courtroom a conclusive demonstration of his son's innocence.

Classical liberalism was revived in the 20th century by Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek, and further developed by Milton Friedman, Robert Nozick, Loren Lomasky, and Jan Narveson.

* Robert Nozick: Criticized Rawls, and argued for libertarianism, by appeal to a hypothetical history of the state and of property.

Nozick suggests that citizens opposed to wealth redistribution that funds programs they object to should be able to opt out by supporting alternative government approved charities with an added 5 % surcharge.

However, it was first analyzed and was published in a philosophy paper spread to the philosophical community by Robert Nozick in 1969, and appeared in Martin Gardner's Scientific American column in 1974.

An anarcho-capitalist and contractarian, Narveson's form of libertarian anarchism is deeply influenced by the thought of Robert Nozick and David Gauthier.

* An interview with Jan Narveson about the philosophy of Robert Nozick by Peter Jaworski

In Anarchy, State, and Utopia, Robert Nozick argues that, while the original position may be the just starting point, any inequalities derived from that distribution by means of free exchange are equally just, and that any re-distributive tax is an infringement on people's liberty.

He states that one of the best attempts to clarify this position is given by Robert Nozick:

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 ).

This for a long time has been the most prevalent defense of toleration by liberals ... It is found, for example, in the writings of American philosophers John Rawls, Robert Nozick, Ronald Dworkin, Brian Barry, and a Canadian, Will Kymlicka, among others.

That some people's " natural assets " were unearned is irrelevant to the equation, according to Nozick, and he argued that people are nevertheless entitled to enjoy these assets and other things freely given by others.

The lifelong process of self-definition in this broader sense is construed indeterministically by Nozick.

A well-known critique of free-market anarchism is by Robert Nozick, who argued that a competitive legal system would evolve toward a monopoly government – even without violating individuals rights in the process.

Despite these comments, Marx has been criticised strongly for adding the " socially necessary " qualification to labour time by the libertarian philosopher Robert Nozick in Anarchy, State and Utopia, for whom it is an unjustified ' bolt-on ' aspect of Marx's theory.

Anarchy, State, and Utopia is a 1974 book by the American political philosopher Robert Nozick.

Nozick also argues that Rand's solution to David Hume's famous is-ought problem is unsatisfactory.