Questions and Answers Pertaining to Nozick’s “Love Bond” 1. In your own words, explain exactly what you think Nozick's is referring to when he talks about formation of a "we"? Nozick appears to be referring to the idea that people cease being unitary, solitary entities and become partners in a larger collaboration that involves sharing a life with another person (or perhaps people, too). Specifically, your well-being is tied to that of the other party: if they are happy, you will be happy – and vice-versa. Beyond that, your autonomy becomes limited because you now make decisions on the basis of what is in the interests of both of you as opposed to what are in your own personal interests. Further, your identity comes to be shaped by your...The end:
.....he relationship becomes a partnership and that both people start living for each other instead of just themselves. However, I think we over-state the opportunities that people lose when they become partners: what you gain is physical intimacy, another source of income, a confidante in times of crisis, and a person who can help you through the difficult challenges of life; when you do not have that person in your life, the want of support and counsel is very acute. In general, however, we are correct to assume that the we is a larger coupling between two people. Works Cited “Notes on Conlon’s ‘why lovers can’t be friends’.” Pp.5-10 (additional information not provided). “On Nozick’s love’s bond.” Pp.1-5 (additional information not provided).