Abstract

This essay is a reply to Joseph Raz's ‘Human Rights in the Emerging World Order’. In that essay Professor Raz made a series of typically sophisticated and subtle arguments about human rights. His analysis suffers, however, from three important flaws that render its arguments unpersuasive. First, in the course of that essay Raz identifies rights with the legal relations that these may entail. Second, he presents human rights as summaries of value. Third, he considers human rights as continuous with interpersonal rights. The best philosophical account of human rights ought to reject all three propositions. Such a theory must, first, draw a clear distinction between legal rights and the legal relations these may entail as their deliberative conclusions. It must, second, highlight the way in which rights are peremptory reasons for action that escape the balancing of value. Finally, it ought to locate human rights in the institutional domain of international relations.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.