Wilt Chamberlain Case Summary

Wilt Chamberlain case from a Rawlsian perspective, one can clearly see how Nozick’s theory fails to account unjust situations. If Wilt Chamberlain was abundantly wealthy and the rest of the community was starving of hunger, wouldn’t the wealth would be much better used to help the overall community? Since we are human, we have reason to think that Wilt Chamberlain would have a duty to help the poor and by keeping his wealth to himself, he is failing to fulfill his moral obligation. However if we tax him and take a little of his wealth to distribute it to the poor, the inequalities will decrease and the overall benefits of the community will increase.
Nozick preaches that inequalities are justified just as long as they don’t deny or take away

Show More

Related Documents: Wilt Chamberlain Case Summary

Biography Of Jeffrey Jordan