Final answer:
Nozick argues for a historical principle of distributive justice and rectification of injustice, while Rawls proposes two principles of justice with fairness and equality in mind.
Step-by-step explanation:
Nozick argues that distributive justice depends on historical entitlement theory and rectification of injustice in holdings. Rawls's theory, which is distinct from Nozick's, proposes two principles. The first principle claims that each person has an equal claim to a fully adequate scheme of basic liberties that are compatible with the same liberties for others. According to the second principle, social and economic inequalities must satisfy two requirements: first, they must be attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity; and second, they must be to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged members of society.
This approach to distributive justice influences how goods, services, and opportunities are distributed in a society, with differing views on the role of government, equality, and personal freedom.