Against the Will Theory of Rights [Book Review]
Res Publica 16 (4):415-423 (2010)
This paper recasts an old objection to the will theory in the light of recent attempts to defend that theory, notably by Nigel Simmonds and Hillel Steiner. It enlists the idea of duties of care—effectively restrictions over legal officials’ discretionary exercise of powers—to form a dilemma for such theorists: either legal officials’ discretion over powers is restricted by duties of care for the unempowerable, or it is not. If their discretion is unrestricted, then the will theory is insensitive to the (values of the) lives of the unempowerable, in virtue of the fact that these lives are viewed as not meriting direct normative consideration. If, on the other hand, their discretion is restricted by duties of care, then the will theory has no argumentative resources within its conceptual apparatus to ascribe or justify them. It is therefore incomplete as a theory of rights
|Keywords||will theory rights|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
Essays on Bentham: Jurisprudence and Political Philosophy.H. L. A. Hart - 1982 - Oxford University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles
The Will Theory of Rights: A Defence. [REVIEW]Paul Graham - 1996 - Law and Philosophy 15 (3):257 - 270.
Hobbes's Theory of Rights – a Modern Interest Theory.Eleanor Curran - 2002 - Journal of Ethics 6 (1):63-86.
Rights, Duties and Responsibilities in Health Care.H. E. Emson - 1992 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 9 (1):3-11.
Natural Rights to Welfare.Siegfried van Duffel - 2013 - European Journal of Philosophy 21 (4):641-664.
Equality and the Duties of Procreators.Peter Vallentyne - 2002 - In David Archard & Colin Macleod (eds.), Children and Political Theory. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2010-11-25
Total downloads52 ( #99,387 of 2,158,890 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #353,777 of 2,158,890 )
How can I increase my downloads?