Abstract

A reconsideration of the logical structure of arguments for property rights reveals that Locke's labor theory of original appropriation is more important than has been previously recognized because the justification of property rights must be deontological and of the four possible justifications of property rights-- universal consent, social utility, self-actualization, and Locke's labor theory--only Locke's theory is deontological. So if any justification of property rights exists, it must be based upon Locke's labor theory. Consequently, if Locke's theory fails, property rights fail