Anarchy, State and Utopia Paperback – 21 Oct 1977
Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought
Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
"...This book is the best piece of sustained analytical argument in political philosophy to have appeared for a very long time." Mind
"...complex, sophisticated and ingenious." Economist--This text refers to an alternate Paperback edition.
About the Author
Robert Nozick was the Joseph Pellegrino University Professor of Philosophy at Harvard University.
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Top Customer Reviews
It’s altogether a very impressive feat of logical, consistent argumentation from first principles. I find the book impeccable. I am not a libertarian after reading Nozick’s book, but it has forced me to devote a lot of time and energy to working out why I’m not a libertarian. After all, who can disagree with the principle of ‘don’t do to others what you wouldn’t want others to do to you’? The morality underlying Nozick’s edifice is entirely acceptable, and yet as the argument progresses I found myself getting more and more uncomfortable. The problem has to do with which rights you might agree are fundamental and inviolable. Is the right to property, however acquired, fundamental to liberty? Nozick argues that it is. Without justice in property, there is no justice. Or Freedom. Or Liberty. Without the concept of private property, we are all potentially slaves to the State.
Concomitant with that proposition is an attitude which can be labelled ‘individual atomism’. Nozick, in keeping with other libertarians like Von Mises, Rothbard and Hoppe believes that individuals are paramount, unique and indivisible. Nothing may impinge on them.Read more ›
Nor, as this previous reviewer writes, is AS&U only currently of interest to Randian libertarians. This is absolutely preposterous, as Nozick actually went out of his way to dismiss Rand in subsequent work, and the forumlations of his arguments here are not Randian. They are far more Lockean. One might also mention that the book did win a National Book Award, which (to me at any rate), would seem to indicate that it is probably not your everyday Randian screed.
As a junior in college, I took a course in political philosophy at the University of Michigan, which boasts of the nation's top faculties in ethics. The introductory political philosophy course that I took there gave heavy doses of both Rawls and Nozick. People who know what they are talking about consider Nozick's book quite important in debate of contemporary political philosophy. Those who clearly don't know what they are talking about (see the 1-star review below) ... well, they simply slam the guy and the book.
In summary, well worth a read.
So there you have it, I fully admit that whole sections of this book went over my head. But I'm glad I read it. Well, I'm not glad I read Chapter 1, which is entitled "Why State-of-Nature Theory?" I would have understood exactly as much of it if it had been written in Sanskrit. And very often this reads like the rantings of a madman. But a fun madman. A humble, honest madman with some amazing moments of clarity.
1. Nozick sketches how a protection agency that guarantees its members' safety and/or property within a particular locale, while striving to compensate non-members for potential transgressions by its members, not only is morally justifiable, but also isn't a million miles away from what we call a state. So if you are some type of anarchist who does not like it, you don't have to join (and you and your fellow anarchists obviously can't expect it to look after you) but if you're just some guy who does not have hangups like that and there's a choice of protection agencies you will naturally go for the one that's most effective in the area where you live. So it's a bit of a natural monopoly locally and it's not something too distasteful. And it's a de facto minimal state. So a multitude of such contiguous minimal states can arise without violating anybody's natural rights. Takes him more than 100 pages to prove the statements I'm repeating (potentially mangling) here, but that's the gist of it.
2.Read more ›
First, this was written back in the days when political debates were Left v Right. It makes no mention at all of environmentalism, and the only time that it mentions animal rights is as an example of an absurdity [Nozick actually believes that eating meat is immoral, but he uses this as an example of how utilitarianism cannot be used as a grounds for the state]. Nozick works on the old premise that, if everyone works hard enough, everyone can get what they want. In this day and age, any such argument must at least respond to the environmentalist argument that this would make life on Earth unsustainable - and I can't see how anyone can convincingly argue that.
Secondly, the book is too American. He talks about universal rights, which belong to every human being, yet writes as if Americans are the only human beings of interest. What about those in other countries who have these rights yet may have greater difficulty in setting up his sort of state [e.g. greater corruption, poorer infrastructure]. If taxation is the theft that Nozick makes it out as, is it unjust that people in Iceland may have to pay greater taxes to protect their natural rights than people in Singapore do [due to admin costs]?Read more ›
Most Recent Customer Reviews
The greatest book on Political Philosophy of all time.
Really I should say more about it but unfortuantely I am
too busy writing a dissertation on this book instead.
I received the book a few days late, I complained and they were very nice about it... The book was perfect! ThanksPublished on 18 Mar. 2014 by lisa
This is my first review so I'll try to make it short. Nozick's book is essentially divided into two interchangeable parts: 1) His story about how governments appear out of a... Read morePublished on 8 Nov. 2012 by A Portuguse Person
Nozick is the considered the originator of the oxymoronic and totally imaginary 'anarcho capitalist' movement. Read morePublished on 3 Nov. 2008 by Ellen S
Nozick's incisive arguments for individual freedom derive from moral conviction rather than economic theory. Read morePublished on 19 July 2008 by Peter Uys
Nozick starts from the assumption that the one basic human right in the "state of nature" is the right to hold property, absolutely, without regard to anyone else. Read morePublished on 29 July 2007 by Too many books
Nozick is original, accessible, fascinating and above all persuasive. The gaps he leaves, like a justification for natural rights are the only parts of the book that dissapoint. Read morePublished on 3 Feb. 2006
This book is a great present for students doing social studies as it out lines the way the govenment is oppresing the state today. Read morePublished on 26 Sept. 2001
Look for similar items by category
- Books > Biography > Political > Political Leaders & Leadership
- Books > History > Political History > Anarchism
- Books > History > Political History > Politicians
- Books > Society, Politics & Philosophy > Government & Politics > Political Science & Ideology > Anarchism
- Books > Society, Politics & Philosophy > Philosophy