Children, Rights, and Powers

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 251-265
Author(s):  
Johannes Giesinger

A long-standing debate on the concept of rights sets the so-called choice theory in contrast to the interest theory. As has been noted in the literature, the debate is relevant for the question of whether children can be conceived as rights-holders at all. This essay reflects on the concept of rights as applied to children, motivated by the view that instead of settling the conceptual issue, we should directly discuss the moral status of children as possible rights-holders. In this way, two main insights are gained. First, it is pointed out that the moral position of children – if they have rights – is very different from the status of adult rights-holders. Second, it is made clear that regardless of whether children have rights, the focus on duties towards children, rather than a focus on their rights, provides us with a clearer picture of children’s moral status.

Author(s):  
Margaret Gilbert

The most influential theories of claims within contemporary rights theory are considered in relation to the demand-right problem. Starting with Hohfeld’s equivalence, contemporary theorists generally aim for an account of claims such that the members of a certain canonical set of claim-ascriptions are true. In pursuit of this aim they tend to focus on directed duties and to assume that these are in part constituted by plain duties. Reviewing the results obtained by adopting this aim and method, this chapter argues that in order to solve the demand-right problem we need to go beyond the resources of Thomson’s constraint theory, Joseph Raz’s “interest” theory, and similar views. The same goes for Hart’s “choice” theory and related positions, and several other approaches more briefly considered.


Author(s):  
Anne Knudsen

Anne Knudsen: The Century of Zoophilia Taking as her point of departure the protests against a dying child having his last wish fulfilled because his wish was to kill a bear, the author argues that animals have achieved a higher moral status than that of humans during the 20th century. The status of animals (and of “nature”) is seen as a consequence of their muteness which on the one hånd makes it impossible for animals to lie, and which on the other hånd allows humans to imagine what animals would say, if they spoke. The development toward zoophilia is explained as a a logical consequence of the cultural naturalisation of humans, and the author draws the conclusion that we may end up entirely without animals as a category. This hypothetical situation will lead to juridical as well as philosophical complications.


Utilitas ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 237-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
ALEX LEVERINGHAUS

Recent debates in just war theory have been concerned with the status of combatants during war. Unfortunately, however, the debate has, up to now, focused on self-defensive wars. The present article changes the focus slightly by exploring the status of combatants during military humanitarian intervention (MHI). It begins by arguing that MHI poses a number of challenges to our thinking about the status of combatants. To solve these it draws on Jeff McMahan's theory of combatant liability. On this basis, the article contends that, first, combatants engaged in atrocities lack the same set of rights and liberties held by intervening combatants. Second, and more controversially, drawing on McMahan's theory as well as the notion of complicity, it suggests that the same applies to those combatants who do not perpetrate atrocities but are merely ordered to defend the target state against the intervening state.


2000 ◽  
Vol 59 (3) ◽  
pp. 473-508 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew H. Kramer

This article seeks to uphold the Interest Theory of legal rights by arguing that such a theory can withstand objections and handle difficulties that are often posed against it. Building on the author’s previous defences of the Interest Theory, the present article also seeks to expose some serious shortcomings in competing theories. Among the topics covered are the role of legal powers of enforcing or waiving legal rights; the possibility of rights to be mistreated; and the status of inoperative rights. In each case, so the article argues, the complexities of the issues involved can best be handled by a theory which maintains that the essential function of legal rights is the protection of various aspects of people’s well-being.


Author(s):  
Anne-Marie Søndergaard Christensen

This is a work in moral philosophy and its ambition is to contribute to a renewed understanding of moral philosophy, the role of moral theory, and the relation between moral philosophy and moral life. It is motivated by the belief that the lack of a coherent answer to the question of the role and status of moral philosophy and the theories it develops, is one of the most important obstacles for doing work in moral philosophy today. The first part of the book untangles various criticisms of the dominant view of moral theories that challenges the explanatory, foundational, authoritative, and action-guiding role of these theories. It also offers an alternative understanding of moral theory as descriptions of moral grammar. The second part investigates the nature of the particularities relevant for an understanding of moral life, both particularities tied to the moral subject, her character, commitments, and moral position, and particularities tied to the context of the subject, her moral community and language. The final part marks a return to moral philosophy and addresses the wider question of what the revised conception of moral theories and the affirmation of the value of the particular mean for moral philosophy by developing a descriptive, pluralistic, and elucidatory conception of moral philosophy. The scope of the book is wide, but its pretensions are more moderate, to present an understanding of descriptive moral philosophy which may spur a debate about the status and role of moral philosophy in relation to our moral lives.


2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 66-87
Author(s):  
David Lamb

Abstract Mainstream theories which argue for enhanced ethical status of animals with appeals to sentience or intelligence have depicted aesthetics in a negative sense. This paper supports a different outlook. We explore reasons why aesthetic appreciation of animals is portrayed as subjective and sentimental, concerned only with superficial and external features. Aesthetic qualities, as understood here, are not intended as criteria for admission to a moral community or as a guide for veterinary professionals when prioritizing therapy. The case for measuring the extent of an animal’s beauty or attractiveness in order to establish its entitlement to moral status or rights is a non-starter. Nevertheless, aesthetic traditions, we argue, play a significant role in our moral response to animals and objectives to protect them. As a corrective to misunderstandings regarding the status of aesthetics in deliberation about moral obligations to animals a case for the integration of ethics and aesthetics is developed.


Utilitas ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 279-307
Author(s):  
Robert Noggle

Impartially Optimizing Consequentialism (IOC) requires agents to act so as to bring about the best outcome, as judged by a preference ordering which is impartial among the needs and interests of all persons. IOC may seem to be only rational response to the recognition that one is only one person among many others with equal intrinsic moral status. A person who adopts a less impartial deontological alternative to IOC may seem to fail to take seriously the fact that other persons matter in the same way that she takes herself to matter. This paper examines this ‘seductive appeal’ of IOC. It argues that IOC is not the only rational way to recognize the fact that each person matters. It presents an alternative conception of how to recognize the status of other persons as beingswho-matter, an alternative that has Kantian rather than consequentialist implications.


2008 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip J. Weiser

The success of airline deregulation challenged the claims of public choice theory, which asserts that regulation serves the purposes of the regulated firms themselves. One prominent explanation for airline deregulation is that "political entrepreneurs" can, under certain circumstances, challenge the status quo. Nonetheless, commentators have failed to examine how Fred Kahn fits the model of a political entrepreneur. By examining Kahn's success as a political entrepreneur, this Essay highlights how commentators and policymakers can gain important insights into how to spur regulatory reform and oversee regulatory reform efforts like that necessary to modernize our system of spectrum management.


1969 ◽  
pp. 1041 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lyne Letourneau

There has been a progressive change in western philosophical thought regarding animals. While animals were once regarded as objects, valuable solely in relation to their use to humans, there is now a substantial movement to recognize animals as inherently valuable and deserving of the same moral status as humans. Thus change in attitude is not reflected in amendments to the Criminal Code anti-cruelty provisions. Vie new provisions recognize that animals have the capacity to feel pain. However, the provisions do not protect animals independently of the benefits that animals provide to humans. Still categorized as property, animals do not share the moral status of humans. Further, under the new provisions, animals do not have legal rights. Therefore, despite changes in the law regarding animals, no animal liberation is taking place.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document