Abstract
AbstractThis essay makes an assessment of Jack Donnelly's model of overlapping consensus on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It raises key questions, such as: How to adjudicate competing rights; what is to become of "unreasonable" views; whence come reasonable views; and, beyond the obvious cases of slavery and genocide, how is the overlapping consensus obtained? While an alternative theory is not developed, a critical perspective is provided that might facilitate further inquiries.
Full Text 
Sign-in/Register to access full text options
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Published version (
Free)
Free) 
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
