Jurisprudence 9 (3):566-588 (2018)
AbstractThis is the first comprehensive explanation and survey of the Interest-Will theories of rights debate. It elucidates the traditional understanding of it as a dispute over how best to explain A RIGHT and clarifies the theories’ competing criteria for that concept. The rest of the article then shows why recent developments are either problematic or simply fail to actually advance the debate. First, it is erroneous, as some theorists have done, to frame the entire debate in terms of competing explanations of the direction of ‘directed’ duties. This is because the theories’ respective answers to that issue are themselves dependent upon their respective conceptions of A RIGHT – ones that do not even necessitate the identification of different directions for such duties. Second, all of the new would-be alternative or hybrid theories are shown to merely be versions of the Interest theory. Third, recent efforts to cabin off the debate to ‘normative’ theorisation (i.e., to morally or politically evaluative accounts) are misguided.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Similar books and articles
The Nature of Rights Debate Rests on a Mistake.Siegfried Van Duffel - 2012 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 93 (1):104-123.
Theories of Rights: Is There a Third Way?Matthew H. Kramer & Hillel Steiner - 2007 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 27 (2):281-310.
Reconciling Feminist Politics and Feminist Ethics on the Issue of Rights.Samantha Brennan - 1999 - Journal of Social Philosophy 30 (2):260–275.
Kramer’s Delimiting Test for Legal Rights.David Frydrych - 2017 - American Journal of Jurisprudence 62 (2):197-207.
A Debate Over Rights.Matthew H. Kramer, N. E. Simmonds & Hillel Steiner - 2000 - Mind 109 (436):954-956.
The Ashley Treatment: Improving Quality of Life or Infringing Dignity and Rights?Caroline Harnacke - 2016 - Bioethics 30 (3):141-150.
Rights and Reason: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Rights.Jonathan L. Gorman - 2003 - Routledge.
References found in this work
Refining the Interest Theory of Rights.M. H. Kramer - 2010 - American Journal of Jurisprudence 55 (1):31-39.
Legal and Moral Obligation.Matthew H. Kramer - 2005 - In Martin P. Golding & William A. Edmundson (eds.), The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Law and Legal Theory. Blackwell. pp. 179--190.