Abstract

This paper critically discusses an objection raised by Robert Nozick’s entitlement theory of justice against the so-called patterned principles of distributive justice. The objection suggests that “patterned principles” treat objects as if they appeared from nowhere. The paper challenges the helpfulness of the schematic label “patterned principles”, shows that the objection raised by the entitlement theory flows from a misreading of the principles falling under that label and suggests that the entitlement theory would be exposed to the same objection, if read in the same light. Furthermore the paper criticizes a conception of the Lockean advocated by the entitlement theory in the course of its objection to “patterned theories of justice” and questions the capacity of the entitlement theory to honour Kant’s formula of the end in itself.