Why State of Nature of Theory? – Robert Nozick

Why State of Nature of Theory?

Chapter – 1

Harshit Sharma

Alumnus (BHU)

Contact

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

The fundamental question of political philosophy is whether a state should exist at all or if anarchy is a viable alternative.
The state of nature is a concept used in traditional political theory to explore whether it is necessary to create a state.
The justification for studying state-of-nature theory is its potential to yield valuable insights into political phenomena.
The most important theoretical question is whether anarchy would be preferable to having a state.
Anarchist theory undercuts the need for political philosophy by suggesting that a state may not be necessary at all.
The investigation into whether anarchy can provide an answer to the problems of political philosophy begins with state-of-nature theory.
The anarchic situation to investigate should focus on a fundamental abstract description of non-state conditions that could apply broadly, avoiding assumptions about particular political contexts.
A pessimistic description of the non-state situation (e.g., a Hobbesian state of nature) may provide a compelling reason to prefer the state over anarchy.
The minimax criterion involves comparing the worst possible non-state situation with the worst possible state, showing that the state could be seen as a better alternative in extreme cases.
The maximax criterion assumes overly optimistic scenarios about anarchy, which may not be convincing enough to justify rejecting the state.
A more useful approach is to focus on a nonstate situation where people generally satisfy moral constraints, providing a reasonable, non-ideal scenario for comparison.
If the state proves superior to even this most optimistic scenario of anarchy, it would provide a rationale for the state’s existence.
Moral constraints are crucial in assessing whether the actions needed to establish and operate a state are morally permissible.
Some anarchists argue that the state inherently violates moral rights and is therefore intrinsically immoral.
Political philosophy must take into account moral philosophy because it establishes the boundaries of what individuals may do to one another, which in turn affects what is permissible through state power.
The fundamental coercive power of the state must align with moral prohibitions and is the source of the state’s legitimacy.
Political philosophy helps address moral disagreements that might arise when determining what is acceptable in the political sphere.

EXPLANATORY POLITICAL THEORY

The investigation of the state of nature serves explanatory purposes in political theory, as it helps to understand the political realm in relation to the nonpolitical.
There are three ways to understand the political realm:
1. Fully explaining it in terms of the nonpolitical.
2. Viewing it as emerging from the nonpolitical but irreducible to it.
3. Treating it as a completely autonomous realm.
A fundamental explanation of the political realm is the most desirable, explaining the political entirely through nonpolitical terms.
To explain the political fundamentally, one can either:
1. Start with a nonpolitical situation and show how a political one arises from it.
2. Start with a political situation described nonpolitically, deriving political features from nonpolitical descriptions.
The explanation is more fundamental the more it connects basic, important features of the human situation and the less directly it resembles the political result.
Exciting results emerge when political features are shown to be reducible to or identical with distinct nonpolitical features.
State-of-nature theory is a safer starting point for a fundamental explanation, exploring how a state would arise from nonpolitical conditions.
A theory of the state of nature begins with descriptions of morally permissible and impermissible actions, exploring how a state could emerge from this.
Even if no state ever arose in this manner, a potential explanation of this process remains valuable for understanding the political realm.
A potential explanation includes an explanation of how a phenomenon could arise from a process, even if that process did not actually occur.
Fact-defective potential explanations may still illuminate a realm if the initial conditions could have been true.
Law-defective potential explanations can also shed light on the nature of a realm, even if they aren’t entirely correct.
Process-defective potential explanations are particularly useful, as they help explain how a process could have explained a phenomenon, even if it did not.
State-of-nature explanations are fundamental potential explanations, offering great insight into the political realm, even if not entirely correct.
Exploring how the state could have arisen, even if it didn’t, increases understanding of political theory.
If the state didn’t arise in the expected way, understanding the reasons for the divergence is crucial to furthering political theory.
Locke’s state of nature serves as the starting point, with individuals in a situation similar to Locke’s model, allowing for examination of political theory’s underlying principles.
Differences from Locke’s state of nature will be addressed when relevant to political philosophy and the argument about the state.
The precise moral theory and law of nature underlying Locke’s model are not fully explored here, acknowledging that a deeper understanding requires a more comprehensive presentation.