Extension of the interpretation of the term “security” on the example of Robert Nozick's “ultra-minimal state”

A minimal state, whose primary function is to protect an individual, is considered the only acceptable type of state for many supporters of liberal concepts. Currently, the concepts “protection of an individual” and “security of an individual” are changing. The article demonstrates the transformation of the protective functions of a minimal state due to changes in the concept “security of an individual”. In Robert Nozick's theory, the principle of reparation governs the relationship between individuals and the imposition of prohibitions. An individual's personality, as well as the idea that all people have the right to do what they want with their lives and personalities, occupies an important place in Nozick's theory. Society and the state should respect the personal choice of an individual. The article does not address discussions about free will and determinism, but addresses the question of how the state can ensure the most independent choice of behaviour by individuals. The problem is that nowadays people are objects of influence of mass culture, and risk making decisions differently than they would like before they became objects of influence. The media dictate stereotypes, and people change their behavior. Protecting individuals from the media would enable them to make decisions more independently of the behavioural patterns dictated. The article demonstrates that the principle of reparation can protect individuals. Due to this protection from the media, the functions of a minimal state are expanded and now the term “security” includes “security from the media”. The second problem is how to ensure the independence of the choice of behaviour by individuals in the context of research results of neuroeconomics, neurobiology, etc. Deficiency of hormones or neurotransmitters and alimentary dystrophy violate the usual process of the choice of behaviour, and influence the attitude towards injustice. Changes in the biochemical balance determine an individual's behaviour and choice. The second stage of the empowerment of a minimal state and of the term “security” is provding “security from internal threats”. Because of actions to ensure the security of individuals from these threats, a liberal minimal state conflicts with the principles of liberalism and with Nozick's theory.

Keywords

Authors

References