Raz on Rights: Human Rights, Fundamental Rights, and Balancing

Ratio Juris 30 (1):25-40 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

After clarifying the outlines of Raz's interest theory of rights and its relationship to aspects of the principles theory of rights, I consider how his recent observations on human rights manage to fit into the interest theory. I then address two questions. First, I elaborate on Raz's definition of morally fundamental rights, arguing that he is right in claiming that there are no such rights. I then show that the interest theory accommodates the notion that rights may take qualitative precedence over conflicting considerations—a question that has become increasingly relevant in light of recent writing on rights.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,867

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-02-07

Downloads
35 (#444,209)

6 months
4 (#1,004,663)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Morality of Freedom.Joseph Raz - 1986 - Philosophy 63 (243):119-122.
Natural Law and Natural Rights.Richard Tuck - 1981 - Philosophical Quarterly 31 (124):282-284.
Practical Reason and Norms.C. H. Whiteley - 1976 - Philosophical Quarterly 26 (104):287-288.
Elements of a theory of human rights.S. E. N. Amartya - 2004 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 32 (4):315–356.
Elements of a Theory of Human Rights.Amartya Sen - 2004 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 32 (4):315-356.

View all 10 references / Add more references