David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 28 (1):19 (2008)
It is the purpose of this article to make the positive case for an under-appreciated conception of rights: specified rights. In contrast to rights conceived generally, a specified right can stand against different behaviour in different circumstances, so that what conflicts with a right in one context may not conflict with it in another. The specified conception of rights thus combines into a single inquiry the two questions that must be answered in invoking the general conception of rights, identifying the content of a right in light of what is justifiable to do under the circumstances. I present the case for specificationism in four sections, focusing on property rights. First, I argue that rights are based upon more fundamental reasons, and that this instrumentalism is compatible only with specificationism—a fact necessity cases illuminate. Next, I explain how specificationism embodies a fully moralized understanding of rights, and point to a dilemma that one faces in denying this. Third, I argue that the gap in property rights exposed in necessity cases entails that there is no right-based duty to compensate in such cases. Finally, I offer an error theory to explain the (false) attraction of the general conception of property rights.
|Keywords||Rights Specificationism Tort Theory|
|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
Frej Klem Thomsen (2015). Prostitution, Disability and Prohibition. Journal of Medical Ethics 41 (6):451-459.
J. D. Shepherd (2012). A Human Right Not to Be Punished? Punishment as Derogation of Rights. Criminal Law and Philosophy 6 (1):31-45.
Marcus Agnafors (2015). Mixing Interest and Control? Assessing Peter Vallentyne’s Hybrid Theory of Rights. Philosophia 43 (4):933-949.
Similar books and articles
Andrew Botterell (2008). In Defence of Infringement. Law and Philosophy 27 (3):269-292.
John Deigh (1988). On Rights and Responsibilities. Law and Philosophy 7 (2):147 - 178.
John Deign (1988). On Rights and Responsibilities. Law and Philosophy 7 (2):147-178.
José Juan Moreso (2012). Ways of Solving Conflicts of Constitutional Rights: Proportionalism and Specificationism. Ratio Juris 25 (1):31-46.
W. J. Talbott (2010). Human Rights and Human Well-Being. Oxford University Press.
J. M. Elegido (1995). Intrinsic Limitations of Property Rights. Journal of Business Ethics 14 (5):411 - 416.
Seumas Miller (2000). Collective Rights and Minority Rights. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 14 (2):241-257.
George E. Panichas (1985). The Structure of Basic Human Rights. Law and Philosophy 4 (3):343 - 375.
Manuel Toscano (2012). Language Rights as Collective Rights: Some Conceptual Considerations on Language Rights. Res Publica 27:109-118.
Rowan Cruft (2006). Against Individualistic Justifications of Property Rights. Utilitas 18 (2):154-172.
Larry May (1986). Corporate Property Rights. Journal of Business Ethics 5 (3):225 - 232.
Jeremy Waldron (1998). Participation: The Right of Rights. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 98 (3):307–337.
Katherine Eddy (2006). Welfare Rights and Conflicts of Rights. Res Publica 12 (4):337-356.
A. I. Melden (1977). Rights and Persons. University of California Press.
Added to index2011-03-16
Total downloads29 ( #143,805 of 1,934,791 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #196,346 of 1,934,791 )
How can I increase my downloads?