The concept of rights.

I argue that one has a right when another has a normative constraint with respect to one. The fact that claims and immunities are the only Hohfeldian elements which constrain another combined with the fact that rights necessarily constrain others gives us reason to think that to have a right is to h...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Rainbolt, George Winston.
Other Authors: Fineberg, Joel
Language:en
Published: The University of Arizona. 1990
Subjects:
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/10150/185094
id ndltd-arizona.edu-oai-arizona.openrepository.com-10150-185094
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-arizona.edu-oai-arizona.openrepository.com-10150-1850942015-10-23T04:30:39Z The concept of rights. Rainbolt, George Winston. Fineberg, Joel Smith, Holly Milo, Ronald Buchanan, Allan Human rights Natural law Ethics. I argue that one has a right when another has a normative constraint with respect to one. The fact that claims and immunities are the only Hohfeldian elements which constrain another combined with the fact that rights necessarily constrain others gives us reason to think that to have a right is to have either a claim OR an immunity. Hohfeldian elements can be defined in terms of fundamental normative concepts such as obligation and impossibility. This analysis provides a plausible account of liberty and power rights. The analysis also resolves the puzzles surrounding mandatory or obligation rights and rights which do not benefit the rightholder. To have a normative constraint with respect to another is to have an obligation or impossibility grounded in a feature of the rightholder. The analysis of rights provides good, but not conclusive, reason to think that there are moral rights. Further, the analysis reveals that the specificity view of rights conflict is true. 1990 text Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic) http://hdl.handle.net/10150/185094 704420273 9028166 en Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. The University of Arizona.
collection NDLTD
language en
sources NDLTD
topic Human rights
Natural law
Ethics.
spellingShingle Human rights
Natural law
Ethics.
Rainbolt, George Winston.
The concept of rights.
description I argue that one has a right when another has a normative constraint with respect to one. The fact that claims and immunities are the only Hohfeldian elements which constrain another combined with the fact that rights necessarily constrain others gives us reason to think that to have a right is to have either a claim OR an immunity. Hohfeldian elements can be defined in terms of fundamental normative concepts such as obligation and impossibility. This analysis provides a plausible account of liberty and power rights. The analysis also resolves the puzzles surrounding mandatory or obligation rights and rights which do not benefit the rightholder. To have a normative constraint with respect to another is to have an obligation or impossibility grounded in a feature of the rightholder. The analysis of rights provides good, but not conclusive, reason to think that there are moral rights. Further, the analysis reveals that the specificity view of rights conflict is true.
author2 Fineberg, Joel
author_facet Fineberg, Joel
Rainbolt, George Winston.
author Rainbolt, George Winston.
author_sort Rainbolt, George Winston.
title The concept of rights.
title_short The concept of rights.
title_full The concept of rights.
title_fullStr The concept of rights.
title_full_unstemmed The concept of rights.
title_sort concept of rights.
publisher The University of Arizona.
publishDate 1990
url http://hdl.handle.net/10150/185094
work_keys_str_mv AT rainboltgeorgewinston theconceptofrights
AT rainboltgeorgewinston conceptofrights
_version_ 1718097545220063232