An Alleged Contradiction in Nozick’s Entitlement Theory

SUSAN MOLLER OKIN, IN her 1989 book Justice, Gender, and the Family, puts forth an objection to Nozick’s entitlement theory. In short, Nozick's entitlement theory states that unowned material resources can be legitimately acquired by labor in a certain sense. Okin argues that an advocate of Nozick’s entitlement theory must, on pain of contradiction, accept that a mother owns her offspring by virtue of being the creator, at least until the offspring has developed certain properties and capabilities. Okin’s argument in support of the claim that one is caught in a contradiction if one accepts Nozick’s entitlement theory and also cherishes the claim that mothers do not own their offspring by virtue of being their creators is presented in section 1. It will be shown here that her position, in its present formulation, does not establish that the entitlement theory is contradictory, though it has morally repugnant implications. And in addition, that it is possible to formulate a slightly different version of her position that is actually stronger in two respects. Section 2 is a discussion of two possible responses to the new stronger version of Okin’s argument and it also establishes that even though the slightly revised, stronger version of her argument undermines Nozick’s entitlement theory, there is a plausible version of the entitlement theory, which remains unaffected by her criticism.