It's Right, It Fits, We Debated, We Decided, I Agree, It's Ours, and It Works: The Gathering Confluence of Human Rights Legitimacy
File version
Accepted Manuscript (AM)
Author(s)
Griffith University Author(s)
Primary Supervisor
Other Supervisors
Editor(s)
Date
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