Question

One of the primary criticisms of the libertarian conception of justice is that it allows luck to have too much power in determining persons’ life chances. Task: Provide a brief account of libertarianism and then, drawing on this account, explain the critic’s concern. On what grounds and in what way does libertarianism leave too much up to luck? Why does the critic claim that this is a problem (what value(s)/principle(s) of justice does it violate)?

Answer 1

Libertarianism is a political philosphy that places primary importance to the liberty of person. But it is a political philosphy so importance of indivaidual liberty is more of a political value. It is a concept drawn from liberlism with addition of political philosphy. Liberalism defines the legitimate powers of government to protect the liberty and individual rights of a person like liberty, rights to life, property,freedom of worship, good life and do what makes them happy with out infringing rights and liberty of orhers. Libertarians put primary importance to right to liberty and they want to limit the powers of government to allow each individual as much freedom of action as others but with infringing same for others. They condsidoer theequal  negative liberty to each person but they focus on the idea of self ownership. This includes rights to to control the use of entity and the owner has rights to sell , rent , or gift and others can not use with out consent. They have rights to transfer their rights and also rights to restrain others from violating these rights and seek compensation in case others use the entity with out consent. Theis can be expalained why boxing matches are considered right but assault is wrong as in boxing matches consent is given. The self owner ship as some cons also as people advocationg self ownership may call reditributive taxation against self ownership and  forced without consent.

libertarians advocate free will of a person and people are morally responsible for their actions. these actions may not be effected by past events and the outcomes of the action depends on the luck of the person and may undermine the free will. For example you may decide to speak truth but you end up speaking lie as your action was according to your will and if the reverse is done it is also your choice but the outcome will depend on luck. there is no explanation to why you opted for a decisiona nd seems it was all by luck that u decided to speak truth or lie.

Leaving too much to luck is a problem and violates law of distributive justice. if a persons free will to choose to speak lie or truth or if it si taken as a matter of luck what the person will speak, may violate others justice and rights as it can be cricial cause and effect relation for eaxmaple in case of witness and evidence in a criminal case. also to bring equality in economy if people express free will whether to give taxes or not it will be against equity and efficiency and will devide the society and harm economy. The luck dependency will hamper the welfare values of nations and societies.