无政府、国家与乌托邦
Anarchy, State, and Utopia
Robert Nozick · 初版 1974 年
14人推荐
42位读者提及
52次提及
为什么值得读
- 深入论证无政府状态因竞争而不稳定、难以持久
- 构建出与罗尔斯正义论形成鲜明对照的分析框架
- 比安·兰德更具理性且深刻重塑思维方式
Anarchy, State, and Utopia 是美国政治哲学家 Robert Nozick 于1974年出版的著作。该书荣获1975年美国国家图书奖（哲学与宗教类），已被翻译成11种语言，并被英国《泰晤士报文学增刊》（Times Literary Supplement）评为“战后（1945–1995）最具影响力的100本书”之一。为了对抗 John Rawls 的 A Theory of Justice（1971），并与 Michael Walzer 展开辩论，Nozick 极力主张建立一种最小限度的国家，即“其功能局限于狭窄的范围，如防止暴力、盗窃、欺诈以及强制履行合同等”。当一个国家
Hacker News 上怎么说
正在加载完整评论……
诺齐克的《无政府、国家与乌托邦》和侯世达的《哥德尔、艾舍尔、巴赫》大概是彻底改变我思维方式的两本书了，比其他任何书都深远。诺齐克就像是一个没那么疯癫版的艾茵·兰德 ;-) 我刚发现《阿特拉斯耸耸肩》那会儿真是爱不释手……
Nozick's 'Anarchy, State, and Utopia' and Hofstadter's 'Godel, Escher, and Bach' probably changed the way I think more than anything else. Nozick is like a less insane version of ayn rand ;-) I loved 'atlas shrugged' when I discovered it…
……各国的政府数量肯定超过了私营实体。http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_Party#Origins 至于哲学层面的基础，倒是有不少好书：诺齐克的《无政府、国家与乌托邦》搭建了一个框架，他做出了一些推论最终导向君主制国家——但从他的前提出发，这绝非必然成立。大卫·弗里德曼的《自由的机制》对此做过探讨：http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Libertarian/Machinery_of_Freed...…
…governments of the world surely outnumber private instances. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_Party#Origins As for the philosophical underpinnings, there are quite a few good books: Nozick's Anarchy State and Utopia lays out a framework, he makes some deductions that result in a monarchist state -- but that is in no way guaranteed from his premises. David Friedman's Machinery of Freedom addresses this: http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Libertarian/Machinery_of_Freed...…
……再分配体系。https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_as_Fairness:_A_Restate... 自由意志主义者理所当然地认为这与自由格格不入，因此摒弃了这种观点。https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy,_State,_and_Utopia 总体而言，我喜欢诺齐克的论证，但认为无政府状态归根到底是一种无视历史、预设过多的乌托邦（不切实际的）终局。所以我更偏向罗尔斯。
…redistribution system. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_as_Fairness:_A_Restate... Libertarians rightly believe this is incompatible with liberty, and thus reject this view. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy,_State,_and_Utopia On the whole, I love Nozick's argument but think ultimately anarchy is a utopian (unrealistic) end that ignores history and presupposes too much. Thus I lean Rawls.
这情形让我想起了罗伯特·诺齐克的《无政府、国家与乌托邦》。那是一部极为精彩的政治哲学著作，他在书中非常有说服力地论证了无政府社会根本不可能维持任何可观的时间。因为这种结构在根本上就是不稳定的，……
The situation reminds me a bit of Robert Nozick's Anarchy, State, and Utopia. It's a great bit of political philosophy where he argues pretty convincingly that an anarchist society cannot exist for any appreciable length of time. Because the arrangement is fundamentally unstable,…
……应该被视为凌驾于公民社会规范之上。顾名思义——要是不这么运转，社会就谈不上文明了。（我极力推荐把约翰·罗尔斯的《正义论》和罗伯特·诺齐克的《无政府、国家与乌托邦》对照着读，这是对该类问题两种截然不同但同样深思熟虑的阐述。）
…should be considered above the norms of civil society. By definition - if it didn't work that way, society would not be civil. (I'd highly recommend reading both A Theory of Justice by John Rawls and Anarchy, State and Utopia by Robert Nozick for two different but equally thoughtful treatments of this sort of thing.)
……经济再分配政策的著作是哈佛大学知名哲学教授约翰·罗尔斯的《正义论》。读完罗尔斯之后，我建议不妨再读读罗伯特·诺齐克带有自由意志主义倾向的《无政府、国家与乌托邦》。诺齐克是哈佛另一位杰出的哲学家，与罗尔斯活跃在同一时期。诺齐克得出了与罗尔斯截然相反的结论。两本书都写得很好，而且完全通俗易懂……
…economic redistribution policies is A Theory of Justice by John Rawls, a renowned professor of philosophy at Harvard. After reading Rawls, I'd suggest maybe reading Robert Nozick's libertarian leaning Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Nozick was another distinguished philosopher from Harvard writing about the same time as Rawls. Nozick comes to a completely different conclusion than Rawls. Both books are good and completely accessible…