Concept Of Individual Rights Research Articles

Toleration and the Law in the West 1500–1700

Before the emergence of the concept of individual rights, in the eighteenth century, toleration was conceded by states only to the corporations that constituted the state. Many states that, like France after the Edict of Nantes, conceded a form of toleration, did so without accepting the principle of toleration. The recognition or toleration of rights for individuals first became possible only in a wholly secularised society such as that of colonial north America.

Symbols as Substance in National Civics Standards

amples of what they have taught with success. I suspect those examples will involve classic speeches and writings and the most significant events in American political history, e.g., the Revolution, the framing and ratifying of the Constitution, the Civil War, the Civil Rights Movement. In addition, some examples should come from political history generally, such as the French Revolution and the World Wars. Any general treatment of the concepts of government should be illustrated by specific examples. If that is done, we will discover that Americans agree more on matters of procedure, such as the rule of law, than they agree on substance, but that even where they disagree, they tend to frame their arguments in terms of rights. Both the procedures associated with the rule of law and the concept of individual rights say a lot about American politics, or, as some would say, American political culture.

Eastern Orthodoxy and Human Rights

The brutality of the holocaust in Europe during World War II precipitated international concern with human rights. Today all countries at least rhetorically attest to their adherence to the international standards of human rights developed by the United Nations and regional organizations beginning with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on 10 December 1948, even when they are in gross violation of these standards. Yet it is important to keep in mind that philosophical thought articulating a conception of individual rights emerged late in the history of humankind. Prior to the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, that is, before the Renaissance and the liberal political philosophers, a secular notion of individual human rights had not been conceptualized and hence had no meaning. By contrast, notions of the good or virtuous life and of justice suffused pre-modern thought. The moves toward the integration of Western Europe in recent decades presume a common intellectual heritage among Europeans. The notion of individual human rights, particularly as embodied in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, constitutes an important dimension of the emerging Europe. In so far as some East European countries aspire to become part of the new Europe an analysis of shared commonalities becomes essential. The extent to which individualism, individual rights, and pluralism can flourish in eastern Europe seems critical for their ability to become part of democratic Europe. This study scrutinizes one aspect of the broad problem of a shared value system between western and eastern Europe; namely, the extent to which the religious heritage of Eastern Orthodoxy, practiced in the Balkans, Russia, and other East European states, is compatible with the Western conception of individual rights. The analysis will focus on, but not be limited to, Greece, the one Eastern Orthodox state currently a member of the European Community and never under communist rule. The difficulties Greece has had and is contin-

The Chinese Moral Ethos and the Concept of Individual Rights

This paper is concerned with the contrast in views between traditional mainstream Chinese philosophy and Western liberal individualism on the importance of the concept of individual rights in social and political thought. The contrast is striking because, whereas individual and political rights have long featured in public discourse in the West, in China, mainstream social and political thought has developed without a notion of individual rights. In search of the significance of this major difference, the paper traces ideas of the self in China through Confucian ethics, and compares the Confucian conception of the self with the deontological liberal conception of the subject as a bearer of rights in the West. Having established that the Chinese way of thinking about the self and about moral agency is in stark contrast to the image of the self as a bearer of rights in the deontological conception, the paper goes on to discuss the inadequacy of the moral individualism of a rights-based morality and argues for an alternative view of morality which places importance on the intrinsic value of collective goods and on membership in a society.

The more‐than‐minimal state defended against Nozick

Abstract Robert Nozick's book, Anarchy, State, and Utopia provides one of the most influential statements of the argument that the welfare state is lacking in moral justification because it infringes property rights. Most previous criticisms of Nozick's work have been concerned to reject the concept of abstract individual rights that forms his starting point. While sound, these criticisms may have little influence on those who find the concept of abstract rights plausible. In this paper Nozick's assumptions about rights are accepted and it is shown that a much more extensive state than Nozick's minimal defensive agency can be supported. Under the specified conditions this stage does not violate these rights. If so much of the argument of those who accept abstract rights is undermined.

Telling the Cancer Patient

<h3>To the Editor.—</h3> The article by Novack et al (241:897, 1979), "Changes in Physicians' Attitudes Toward Telling the Cancer Patient," was an important one. Properly, it evoked two editorials (241:928, 1979) that appeared in the same issue. However, the conclusions of the article and both of the editorials were bone chilling. The original article concludes that "physicians are still basing their communications with cancer patients on emotion-laden personal convictions" rather than the outcome of properly designed scientific studies. The statement presents the authors' belief that behavior regarding human rights should properly be based on research studies. I strongly disagree with this unfounded assumption of the authors. Patients should be told the basic nature of their illness because it is their right to know. That conclusion is based on my conception of individual rights. Such a conception is the product of my values, which are heavily influenced by societal and emotional

Evolution of children's rights and implications for present policy

The decent treatment of children is a radical invention of our times. We believe that children have rights — rights to adequate food, shelter, and consistent care - based on their needs as developing organisms. Because of our concern for children as human beings, we are sensitive to their brutalization by adult caretakers. These ideas would have been incomprehensible to a person born several hundred years ago, when the concept of individual rights was almost unknown. The aim of this presentation is to discuss the evolution of children's rights and to place what we know about child abuse in the context of this evolution. We can then see how far we have progressed and perhaps get some perspective on desirable directions for the future.

The Basic Symbols of the American Political Tradition.

When it was first published twenty-five years ago, this classic work of political theory gained notoriety because neither its approach nor its interpretations readily fit into any of major schools of thought dealing with American political tradition. More significantly, its arguments challenged core tenets of what had become received wisdom concerning roots of our political beliefs and institutions. Willmoore Kendall and George W. Carey argue that a new, largely contrived political tradition has gained currency in many legal, academic, and political circles. This new tradition, set forth by Lincoln in his Gettysburg Address, holds that our fundamental political ideas are derived from Bill of Rights and men are created equal clause of Declaration of Independence. Proponents of this view not only champion individual rights but also believe that achievement of a broadly defined equality represents a binding but as yet unfulfilled promise made by American people in Declaration. In present work, Kendall and Carey instead maintain that one must look to founding era and its key documents in order to understand our indigenous political tradition. In so doing, one sees that right of people to govern themselves, rather than concept of individual rights, is at heart of American political tradition. Using analytical approach developed by Eric Voegelin, authors examine documents that are vital to an understanding of our political origins: the Mayflower Compact, Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, Massachusetts Body of Liberties, Virginia Bill of Rights, Constitution itself, and the Federalist Papers. At same time, they consider questions highly relevant to subsequent course of American political development. This thought-provoking book contributes important arguments to fundamental debate over place of equality in our political self-understanding. It will continue to be of immense interest to all serious students of American political thought.