Abstract
The claim-right model of rights contends that Hohfeldian ‘claim-rights’ defined in terms of a constitutive correlativity with directed duties mark a distinctive phenomenon encompassing paradigmatic moral rights. Recent criticisms suggest this traditional model faces a dilemma: any plausible specification (i) is extensionally or explanatorily inadequate or (ii) cannot serve a distinct normative purpose intended by those invoking rights. This work defends the claim-right model against this line of critique. It demonstrates that proper understandings of the extensional/explanatory adequacy criteria and the intended taxonomic role claim-rights are meant to fulfil dissolve the apparent dilemma and support the model.
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 callSimilar Papers
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.
