David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Social Philosophy and Policy 2 (01):61- (1984)
Future historians of moral and political philosophy may well label our period the Age of Rights. In moral philosophy it is now widely assumed that the two most plausible types of normative theories are Utilitarianism and Kantian theories and that the contest between them must be decided in the end by seeing whether Utilitarianism can accommodate a prominent role for rights in morality. In political philosophy even the most bitter opponents in the perennial debate over conflicts between liberty and equality often share a common assumption: that the issue of liberty versus equality can only be resolved by determining which is the correct theory of rights. Some contend that equal respect for persons requires enforcement of moral rights to goods and services required for the pursuit of one's own conception of the good, while others protest that an enforced system of ‘positive’ rights violates the right to liberty whose recognition is the essence of equal respect for persons. The dominant views in contemporary moral and political philosophy combine an almost unbounded enthusiasm for the concept of rights with seemingly incessant disagreement about what our rights are and which rights are most basic. Unfortunately, that which enjoys our greatest enthusiasm is often that about which we are least critical. My aim in this essay is to take a step backward in order to examine the assumption that frames the most important debates in contemporary moral and political philosophy – the assumption that the concept of a right has certain unique features which make rights so especially valuable as to be virtually indispensable elements of any acceptable social order
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Adam Etinson (2013). Human Rights, Claimability and the Uses of Abstraction. Utilitas 25 (4):463-486.
Similar books and articles
Paul Green (1987). The Logic of Special Rights. Hypatia 2 (1):67 - 70.
Rex Martin (2012). Natural Rights Human Rights and the Role of Social Recognition. Collingwood and British Idealism Studies 17 (1):91-115.
George E. Panichas (1985). The Structure of Basic Human Rights. Law and Philosophy 4 (3):343 - 375.
Gunnar Beck (2008). The Mythology of Human Rights. Ratio Juris 21 (3):312-347.
Matthew J. Lister (2011). Are Institutions and Empiricism Enough? [REVIEW] Transnational Legal Theory 2 (1).
Christian Barry & Nicholas Southwood (2011). What Is Special About Human Rights? Ethics and International Affairs 25 (3):369-83.
William N. Nelson (1974). Special Rights, General Rights, and Social Justice. Philosophy and Public Affairs 3 (4):410-430.
Peter Vallentyne (2002). Equality and the Duties of Procreators. In David Archard & Colin Macleod (eds.), Children and Political Theory. Oxford University Press.
Jeremy Waldron (1998). Participation: The Right of Rights. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 98 (3):307–337.
W. J. Talbott (2010). Human Rights and Human Well-Being. Oxford University Press.
Seumas Miller (2000). Collective Rights and Minority Rights. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 14 (2):241-257.
Siegfried van Duffel (2013). Natural Rights to Welfare. European Journal of Philosophy 21 (4):641-664.
Burleigh Wilkins (2008). Rawls on Human Rights: A Review Essay. [REVIEW] Journal of Ethics 12 (1):105 - 122.
Bryan R. Warnick (2012). Student Rights to Religious Expression and the Special Characteristics of Schools. Educational Theory 62 (1):59-74.
Added to index2010-08-31
Total downloads87 ( #18,537 of 1,679,339 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #39,951 of 1,679,339 )
How can I increase my downloads?