One way to understand the opposition between Nozick and Rawls on economic justice is to raise the question of so called Lockean rights. According to Nozick we are born with certain basic entitlements one of which is liberty. Questions of justice fr nozick, then, become questions of how to best safe guard our right to free exchange. Rawls, on the other hand, eschews the idea that we have rights independent from societal inclusion. Justice then becomes a question of optimal social arrangment. Rawls, of course, thinks the best way to justify such an arrangement is by using the thought experiment of the Viel of Ignorance. Write a 4-6 page essay for a general reader that: 1. Lays out what a Lockean Right is supposed to be, 2. Explains how such rights are supposed to relate to Nozicks Entitlement Theory. 3. Demonstrates how Nozick uses the Wilt Chamberlin example to argue for his preferred view. 4. Raises the question of society and natural rights by considering rawls focus on the origional position. 5. Shows how the Veil of Ignorance is supposed to work as a tool for justifying a principle of justice. 6. Says what two principles allegedly fall out of the Viel of Ignorance and why Rawls thinks so. Explores the implications of these two different approaches to justice and economic distribution for the water case study outlined in section 3.2 of chapter 3. You may advance a Thesis if you choose buy be sure to offer reasons for the view you wish to defend.