Abstract
A satisfactory normative theory of acceptable risk would be useful in resolving current disputes over government safety regulation of the workplace, consumer products, and technology. Alan Gewirth has attempted to develop such a theory, arguing from the individual's right not to be harmed by the risk-imposing activities of others. His theory is analyzed in detail, and the difficulties faced by such rights-based (deontological) approaches are pointed out. It is argued that a satisfactory theory will not be of a simple rights-based form. Reason is also given for doubting that it will be of a simple utilitarian form.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Additional information
Eric Von Magnus is Assistant Professor of Humanities at the University of New Haven, and Fellow at the Center for the Study of Values, University of Delaware. His most important publication is: ‘Risk, State, and Nozick’, Midwest Studies in Philosophy, Vol. 7, Social and Political Philosophy.
The author gratefully acknowledges support from the Rockefeller Foundation and the Center for the Study of Values, University of Delaware.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Von Magnus, E. Rights and risks. J Bus Ethics 2, 23–26 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00382709
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00382709