Journal of Ethics 4 (1-2):71-98 (2000)
|Abstract||This essay critically examines three theories of moral rights, theBenefit, the Interest, and the Choice theories. The Interest andChoice theories attempt to explain how rights can be more robustthan seems possible on the Benefit theory. In particular, moralrights are supposed to be resistant to trade-offs to supportprincipled anti-paternalism, to constitute a distinct dimensionof morality, and to provide right holders with a range ofdiscretionary choice. I argue that these and other featuresare better yet provided by a fourth theory of moral rights, theJurisdiction theory.|
|Keywords||agent-relativity benefit theory choice theory individuated aims interest theory moral rights paternalism|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Rowan Cruft (2004). Rights: Beyond Interest Theory and Will Theory? [REVIEW] Law and Philosophy 23 (4):347 - 397.
George E. Panichas (1985). The Structure of Basic Human Rights. Law and Philosophy 4 (3):343 - 375.
Mark Rowlands (2009). Animal Rights: Moral Theory and Practice. Palgrave Macmillan.
Eric Mack (1999). In Defense of Individualism. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 2 (2):87-115.
Eleanor Curran (2002). Hobbes's Theory of Rights – a Modern Interest Theory. Journal of Ethics 6 (1):63-86.
Paul Graham (1996). The Will Theory of Rights: A Defence. [REVIEW] Law and Philosophy 15 (3):257 - 270.
Siegfried van Duffel (forthcoming). Natural Rights to Welfare. European Journal of Philosophy.
Samantha Brennan (1999). Reconciling Feminist Politics and Feminist Ethics on the Issue of Rights. Journal of Social Philosophy 30 (2):260–275.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads32 ( #43,395 of 722,813 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,813 )
How can I increase my downloads?