Lost in moral space: On the infringing/violating distinction and its place in the theory of rights [Book Review]
Law and Philosophy 23 (4):325 - 346 (2004)
|Abstract||The infringing/violating distinction, first drawn by Judith Jarvis Thomson, is central to much contemporary rights theory. According to Thomson, conduct that is in some sense opposed to a right infringes it, while conduct that is also wrong violates the right. This distinction finds a home what I call, borrowing Robert Nozick's parlance, a "moral space" conception of rights, for the infringing/violating distinction presupposes that, as Nozick puts it, "a line (or hyper-plane) circumscribes an area in moral space around an individual." In this paper, I argue against the moral space conception of rights, and more specifically, against incorporating the infringing/violating distinction into a theory of rights. There are other compelling ways to think about rights and it is my goal to stimulate their exploration.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Marc A. Cohen (2010). The Narrow Application of Rawls in Business Ethics: A Political Conception of Both Stakeholder Theory and the Morality of Markets. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 97 (4):563-579.
L. W. Sumner (1987). The Moral Foundation of Rights. Oxford University Press.
Ori J. Herstein (2012). Defending the Right To Do Wrong. Law and Philosophy 31 (3):343-365.
Louis G. Lombardi (1985). The Nature of Rights. Philosophy Research Archives 11:431-439.
Paul Weithman (2009). God's Velveteen Rabbit. Journal of Religious Ethics 37 (2):243-260.
Jeremy Waldron (2005). Nozick and Locke: Filling the Space of Rights. Social Philosophy and Policy 22 (1):81-110.
George E. Panichas (1985). The Structure of Basic Human Rights. Law and Philosophy 4 (3):343 - 375.
Seumas Miller (2000). Collective Rights and Minority Rights. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 14 (2):241-257.
Judith Wagner Decew (1988). Moral Rights: Conflicts and Valid Claims. Philosophical Studies 54 (1):63 - 86.
John Oberdiek (2008). What's Wrong with Infringements (Insofar as Infringements Are Not Wrong): A Reply. [REVIEW] Law and Philosophy 27 (3):293 - 307.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads15 ( #85,922 of 722,777 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,777 )
How can I increase my downloads?