Between political liberalism and postnational cosmopolitanism: Toward an alternative theory of human rights
Political Theory 31 (3):359-391 (2003)
| Abstract | It is well known that Rawls and Habermas propose different strategies for justifying and classifying human rights. The author argues that neither approach satisfies what he regards as threshold conditions of determinacy, rank ordering, and completeness that any enforceable system of human rights must possess. A related concern is that neither develops an adequate account of group rights, which the author argues fulfills subsidiary conditions for realizing human rights under specific conditions. This latter defect is especially serious in light of the different but equal roles that both subnational groups as well as supernational organizations play in bringing about a just global distribution of economic resources | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,865 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesJ. Ci (2005). Taking the Reasons for Human Rights Seriously. Political Theory 33 (2):243 - 265.
Kory P. Schaff (2006). Are There Human Rights? Radical Philosophy Today 2006:261-267.
Joseph Raz (2010). Human Rights Without Foundations. In J. Tasioulas & S. Besson (eds.), The Philosphy of International Law. Oxford University Press.
Costas Douzinas (2007). Human Rights and Empire: The Political Philosophy of Cosmopolitanism. Routledge-Cavendish.
Doris Schroeder (forthcoming). Human Rights and Human Dignity. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads20 ( #62,387 of 556,803 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,847 of 556,803 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
