User:Benberg11/Lockean proviso

Criticisms:[edit]
Critics of the Lockean Proviso point to the fact that it conflicts with Nozick's libertarian principles. Philosopher Jon Mandle points out in "Problems in Value Theory: An Introduction to Contemporary Debates" that the Lockean Proviso limits certain freedoms stating "Nozick holds that property rights do not entitle one to transfer ownership without limitation." (Pg.13). For that reason (limits freedoms) many libertarians reject the Lockean Proviso.

Socialist critics of the Proviso such as G.A. Cohen point to the issue that the Proviso does not take into account previously existing inequalities. Cohen describes the Lockean Proviso's first come first serve approach as "morally dubious". He uses the example of someone claiming a beach as "their own" and charging $1 admission in exchange for lifeguarding service. This would satisfy the proviso because it doesn't make anyone's life "worse" but it fails to consider how much better off everyone would be if someone owned the beach and charged only 50 cents for better service. He continues that this superior alternative is never considered under Nozick’s proviso "(Cohen, 1995).

point to the outstanding issue that it's distribution does not account for the property people may have already gained under a previous distribution. This can lead to unfair advantages in the new distribution. One such critic, G.A. Cohen provides an example stating that "one can satisfy Nozick’s proviso by ‘acquiring’ a beach and charging $1 admission to those who previously were able to use the beach for free, so long as one compensates them with a benefit they deem equally valuable, such as a clean-up or life-guarding service on the beach. However, the beach-goers would have been even better off had the more efficient organizer among them acquired the beach, charging only 50 cents for the same service, but this alternative is never considered under Nozick’s proviso "(Cohen, 1995).

Peer Review Response:

Critique 1: Specifically, the last sentence in which you mention the lifeguard example should really be synthesized into direct information instead of an analogy. That kind of example can prove confusing for non-English speakers, and analogy's can be too vague to add clear and concise information to the conversation.

Response: This is a fair critique. My analysis of the analogy leaves a bit to be desired and I will definitely make it more concrete.

Critique 2: My biggest nit-pick is with how you introduce ideas. Instead of opening a sentence with "Philosopher Jon Mandle points out in "Problems in Value Theory: An Introduction to Contemporary Debates" [...]", just state what Jon Mandle says, without quoting him directly.

Response: Im not entirely sure about this one. I personally think the way I introduced Mandle's quote was proper and gave me the opportunity to provide a link to his work. Maybe I can remove the book title so it is not so long.

Critique 3: You need to create a proper citation for every quotation you've used. Anytime you used a direct quotation, you need to use a proper footnote and citation.

Response: This is a simple but very important bit of advice. I am adding proper citations.

Critique 4: Generally, the lack of diversity in your sources is harming to your edit, this singular POV through one cited author can be viewed as weak.

Response: I agree with this from the standpoint of it is way better to have many perspectives. However, I will add that the section is labeled criticisms, so the point of views are all going to be critical in this section.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/justice-distributive/

Cohen, G. A., 1995, Self-Ownership, Freedom, and Equality, New York: Cambridge University Press.