Philosophy and Public Affairs 33 (3):223–252 (2005)
|Abstract||The twentieth century saw a vigorous debate over the nature of rights. Will theorists argued that the function of rights is to allocate domains of freedom. Interest theorists portrayed rights as defenders of well-being. Each side declared its conceptual analysis to be closer to an ordinary understanding of what rights there are, and to an ordinary understand- ing of what rights do for rightholders. Neither side could win a decisive victory, and the debate ended in a standoff.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Louis G. Lombardi (1985). The Nature of Rights. Philosophy Research Archives 11:431-439.
Seumas Miller (2000). Collective Rights and Minority Rights. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 14 (2):241-257.
W. J. Talbott (2010). Human Rights and Human Well-Being. Oxford University Press.
Leif Wenar (2003). Epistemic Rights and Legal Rights. Analysis 63 (2):142–146.
Leif Wenar, Rights. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Siegfried van Duffel (2010). From Objective Right to Subjective Rights: The Franciscans and the Interest and Will Conceptions of Rights. In Virpi Mäkinen (ed.), The Nature of Rights: Moral and Political Aspects of Rights in Late Medieval and Early Modern Philosophy. The Philosophical Society of Finland.
Terrance McConnell (1984). The Nature and Basis of Inalienable Rights. Law and Philosophy 3 (1):25 - 59.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads98 ( #8,144 of 722,776 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #25,982 of 722,776 )
How can I increase my downloads?