David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (2):143-157 (2012)
It is a crucial question whether practicalities should have an impact in developing an applicable theory of human rights—and if, how (far) such constraints can be justified. In the course of the non-ideal turn of today’s political philosophy, any entitlements (and social entitlements in particular) stand under the proviso of practical feasibility. It would, after all, be unreasonable to demand something which is, under the given political and economic circumstances, unachievable. Thus, many theorist—particularly those belonging to the liberal camp—begin to question the very idea of social human rights on grounds of practical infeasibility. This new minimalism about human rights motivates an immanent critique arguing that even if we were to proceed from a liberal framework, we would still wind up with a justification of the full list of social human rights. In the first part of this article, I will present the central positions of the debate presented by Amartya Sen, Maurice Cranston and Pablo Gilabert. Initially arguing that a minimalism of human rights on grounds of practical infeasibility alone proves unjustifiable, however, I shall open up two further perspectives, which allow practical infeasibilities to become normatively determinate. Discussing contributions by James Griffin and Charles Beitz, I will defend the thesis that certain feasibility constraints on (social) human rights can be justified on the condition that they are grounded either in a normative idea of the appropriate implementation of these rights or in reflection of the practical function of a theory of human rights
|Keywords||Human rights Social human rights Feasibility Beitz Non-ideal theory|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
References found in this work BETA
Allen Buchanan (2000). Rawls's Law of Peoples: Rules for a Vanished Westphalian World. Ethics 110 (4):697-721.
Allen E. Buchanan (2004). Justice, Legitimacy, and Self-Determination: Moral Foundations for International Law. Oxford University Press.
Joshua Cohen (2004). Minimalism About Human Rights: The Most We Can Hope For? Journal of Political Philosophy 12 (2):190–213.
Joel Feinberg (1973). Social Philosophy. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.,Prentice-Hall.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Pablo Gilabert (2009). The Feasibility of Basic Socioeconomic Human Rights: A Conceptual Exploration. Philosophical Quarterly 59 (237):659-681.
David Miller (2012). Grounding Human Rights. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 15 (4):407-427.
João Cardoso Rosas (2008). Human Rights. Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 11:93-100.
Amartya Sen (2012). The Global Reach of Human Rights. Journal of Applied Philosophy 29 (2):91-100.
Alasdair Cochrane (2012). From Human Rights to Sentient Rights. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 16 (5):655-675.
Adam Etinson (2010). To Be or Not to Be: Charles Beitz on the Philosophy of Human Rights. Res Publica 16 (4):441-448.
John Mahoney (2007). The Challenge of Human Rights: Origin, Development, and Significance. Blackwell Pub..
Charles Jones (2013). The Human Right to Subsistence. Journal of Applied Philosophy 30 (1):57-72.
Kieran Oberman (2013). Beyond Sectarianism? On David Miller's Theory of Human Rights. Res Publica 19 (3):275-283.
A. Belden Fields (2003). Rethinking Human Rights for the New Millennium. Palgrave Macmillan.
Carol S. Robb (1998). Liberties, Claims, Entitlements, and Trumps: Reproductive Rights and Ecological Responsibilities. Journal of Religious Ethics 26 (2):283 - 294.
Doris Schroeder (2012). Human Rights and Human Dignity. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (3):323-335.
Added to index2011-04-06
Total downloads53 ( #25,182 of 1,088,784 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #69,666 of 1,088,784 )
How can I increase my downloads?