The proplem of justice between utopia and reality: The comparison of the theories of justice of John Rawls and Robert Nozick

The liberal theory of justice is one of theories of justice which interpretes justice in a matrix that comprises several elements. It can be said that this thesis has two aims in that direction. The first one highligts that the liberal theory of justice should contains some elements and make these elements methodoligically and coherently connected. The liberal theory of justice defines the concept of justice and the society in terms of freedom, equality, entitlement and living together. However, all philosophers studying in Philosophy build their accounts of justice on the basis of a different inputs which includes those elements above. As a result, it can be said that there is no consensus on the boundaries of liberal theory of justice. The second aim of this thesis is to reinterpret the boundaries of liberal theory of justice by comparing the theories of justice of John Rawls and Robert Nozick and taking account of the criticisms that are directed to their theories. The theories of justice of Rawls and Nozick included similar and difference comments regarding to these elements, and the criticisms to have been directed to their theories give enough clues about what the elements which the liberal theory of justice should comprise are and how to connect them coherently. The similarities and differences between the theories of justice of Rawls and Nozick point out that there is a possible interpretation except the interpretation of liberal theory of justice which is based on the priority of self, negative freedom, entitlement and this possible interpretation can be found in the liberal theory of justice itself. Keywords: 1. Justice 2. Utopia 3. Norm 4. John Rawls 5. Robert Nozick