David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Social Philosophy and Policy 22 (1):111-147 (2005)
Natural rights theorists such as John Locke and Robert Nozick provide arguments for limited government that are grounded on the individual's possession of natural rights to life, liberty, and property. Resting on natural rights, such arguments can be no more persuasive than the underlying arguments for the existence of such rights, which are notoriously weak. In this article, John Hasnas offers an alternative conception of natural rights, “empirical natural rights,” that are not beset by the objections typically raised against traditional natural rights. Empirical natural rights are rights that evolve in the state of nature rather than those that individuals are antecedently endowed with in that state. Professor Hasnas argues that empirical natural rights are true natural rights, that is, pre-political rights with natural grounds that can be possessed in the state of nature, and that, when taken together, they form a close approximation of the Lockean rights to life, liberty, and property. He furthers argues that empirical natural rights are normatively well-grounded because respecting them is productive of social peace, which possesses instrumental moral value regardless of one's conception inherent value. Professor Hasnas thus offers his conception of rights as solved problems as an alternative and potentially more secure footing for the traditional natural rights arguments for limited government associated with Locke and Nozick. Footnotesa I wish to thank my fellow contributors to this volume, Ellen Frankel Paul, and Ann C. Tunstall of SciLucent, LLC, for their exceedingly helpful comments on an earlier draft of this essay, and Annette Hasnas for the keen insight she provided into how human beings behave in the state of nature.
|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
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Helga Varden (2009). Nozick's Reply to the Anarchist. Law and Philosophy 28 (6):585 - 616.
Henrik Syse (2007). Natural Law, Religion, and Rights: An Exploration of the Relationship Between Natural Law and Natural Rights, with Special Emphasis on the Teachings of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. St. Augustine's Press.
W. J. Talbott (2010). Human Rights and Human Well-Being. Oxford University Press.
Ellen Frankel Paul, Fred Dycus Miller & Jeffrey Paul (eds.) (2005). Natural Rights Liberalism From Locke to Nozick. Cambridge University Press.
Gary B. Herbert (2005). On the Misconceived Genealogy of Human Rights. Social Philosophy Today 21:17-32.
Hugh V. McLachlan (2010). Moral Rights to Life, Both Natural and Non-Natural: Reflections on James Griffin's Account of Human Rights. Diametros 26:58-76.
Karl Widerquist (2009). A Dilemma for Libertarianism. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 8 (1):43-72.
Samuel Gregg (2009). Metaphysics and Modernity: Natural Law and Natural Rights in Gershom Carmichael and Francis Hutcheson. Journal of Scottish Philosophy 7 (1):87-102.
Richard J. Arneson (2005). The Shape of Lockean Rights: Fairness, Pareto, Moderation, and Consent. Social Philosophy and Policy 22 (1):255-285.
Christopher W. Morris (2005). Natural Rights and Political Legitimacy. Social Philosophy and Policy 22 (1):314-329.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads63 ( #30,346 of 1,692,493 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #75,638 of 1,692,493 )
How can I increase my downloads?