It's Right, It Fits, We Debated, We Decided, I Agree, It's Ours, and It Works: The Gathering Confluence of Human Rights Legitimacy

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
File version

Accepted Manuscript (AM)

Author(s)
Breakey, Hugh
Griffith University Author(s)
Primary Supervisor
Other Supervisors
Editor(s)
Date
2018
Size
File type(s)
Location
License
Abstract

How should we understand human rights and why might we respect them? The current literature – both philosophical and historical – presents a barrage of conflicting accounts, including moral, functional, deliberative, legal, consensual, communitarian and pragmatic approaches. I argue that each approach captures a unique, common-sense – and, in principle, compatible – insight into why human rights warrant respect. Acknowledging this compatibility illuminates the myriad different avenues for legitimacy human rights enjoy, and provides a historical window into explaining how human rights rose to become the international community’s ethical lingua franca. The depth and spread of convergence on human rights proved possible precisely because myriad people the world over found a wealth of disparate reasons for rallying under its banner. But even as human rights enjoy seven distinct sources of legitimacy, I argue that they are thereby opened for normative challenge on seven distinct fronts.

Journal Title

Law and Philosophy

Conference Title
Book Title
Edition
Volume

37

Issue

1

Thesis Type
Degree Program
School
Publisher link
Patent number
Funder(s)
Grant identifier(s)
Rights Statement
Rights Statement

© 2018 Springer Netherlands. This is an electronic version of an article published in Law and Philosophy, 2018, Volume 37, Issue 1, pp 1–28. Law and Philosophy is available online at: http://link.springer.com/ with the open URL of your article.

Item Access Status
Note
Access the data
Related item(s)
Subject

Public law

Law in context

Applied ethics

Persistent link to this record
Citation
Collections