Ethics 79 (4):309-315 (1969)
The central purpose of the paper is to elucidate the inalienable rights thesis, I.E. That there is at least one inalienable right. Various senses of 'natural right' and 'inalienable' are analyzed so as to further clarify what is or could be the meaning and the truth of that thesis. A widespread confusion between the meaning of the terms 'inalienable natural right' and 'indefeasible natural right' is dispelled. It is concluded that present thinking about inalienable natural rights does not reveal precisely why and in what sense there is such a right. A successful defense of the inalienable rights thesis is suggested
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Should We Let Employees Contract Away Their Rights Against Arbitrary Discharge?Michael J. Phillips - 1994 - Journal of Business Ethics 13 (4):233 - 242.
Similar books and articles
Against the Inalienable Right to Withdraw From Research.Eric Chwang - 2008 - Bioethics 22 (7):370-378.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads22 ( #223,196 of 2,154,159 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #224,989 of 2,154,159 )
How can I increase my downloads?