PHIL HUMAN RIGHTS

Card Set Information

Author:
allTHNGSabsolut
ID:
292735
Filename:
PHIL HUMAN RIGHTS
Updated:
2015-04-08 23:21:25
Tags:
PHIL HUMAN RIGHTS
Folders:
PHIL HUMAN RIGHTS
Description:
PHIL HUMAN RIGHTS notes
Show Answers:

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview

The flashcards below were created by user allTHNGSabsolut on FreezingBlue Flashcards. What would you like to do?


  1. Moral Paternalism
    Paternalism is the interference of a state or an individual with another person, against their will, and defended or motivated by a claim that the person interfered with will be better off or protected from harm.
  2. Moral Infallibilism
    knowing moral truth with certainty- blindly.
  3. moral philosophy
    the branch of philosophy dealing with bothargument about the content of morality andmeta-ethical discussion of the nature of moraljudgment, language, argument, and value
  4. Morality
    conformity to the rules of right conduct; moral orvirtuous conduct.
  5. fallible
    1.(of persons) liable to err, especially in beingdeceived or mistaken.

    2.liable to be erroneous or false; not accurate:
  6. Metaphysics
    the branch of philosophy that treats of firstprinciples, includes ontology and cosmology, andis intimately connected with epistemology.
  7. human rights
    • rights that should be
    • guaranteed to normal, human adults
  8. When I say some basic human rights should be
    universal
    I mean they should be legally protected everywhere
  9. Humans should have basic human rights not because of their species but because?
    Certain capacities, capacity for judgement.
  10. Some advocates of universal human rights believe the reason human rights should
    be universally protected is that a society in which human rights are guaranteed will do a
    better job of promoting well-being.

    these advocates are?
  11. consequentialists
  12. Nonconsequentialists believe?
    the protection of human rights has moral importance independent of its contribution to human human well being.

    that it is required in order to show the proper respect for autonomous moral agents. Most defenders of universal human rights are nonconsequentialists.
  13. pragmatic factors
    When human beings don't act on their moral beliefs 

    non-moral factors
  14. Moral imperialism
    is expressed in attempts to impose moral standards from one particular culture, geopolitical region or culture onto other cultures, regions or countries
  15. Proof paradigm
    • The Proof paradigm is a
    • model of reasons for belief
  16. moral justification
  17. ormative moral theory,  principles that
    • explain why particular actual or hypothetical social arrangements or practices or actions
    • are justified or not justified
  18. epistemic
    of or relating to knowledge or the conditions foracquiring it.
  19. P.M.J
    Particular moral judgement
  20. Rearrange these in the correct order:

    judgement, moral norm, possible rejection
    moral norm>judgement>possible rejection
  21. MN
    moral norm
  22. moral principals or norms
    • generalizations about what sorts of acts, practices, or social arrangements are morally wrong, morally
    • permitted (i.e., not morally wrong), or are morally required
  23. premises
    a proposition supporting orhelping to support a conclusion

    an earlier statement in a document.
  24. epistemic justification is transmitted in one direction from the premises to the
    conclusion, He refer to this as a top-down model of moral reasoning 

    this from
    proof paradigm
  25. NORMATIVE TERMS
    • terms that have
    • ACTION-GUIDING [PRESCRIPTIVE/
    • PROSCRIPTIVE] force.
  26. Some common normative terms are:
    • ought; duty;
    • obligation; permissible; and forbidden
  27. NORMATIVE MORAL TERMS are
  28. NORMATIVE
    TERMS with MORAL ACTION-GUIDING force
  29. EVALUATIVE TERMS
    • are terms that express
    • approval or disapproval
  30. PURELY DESCRIPTIVE TERMS
    • are terms that are
    • NOT NORMATIVE and NOT EVALUATIVE
  31. Negative rights
    the civil and political rights of persons against the power of governments
  32. Postive Rights
    The rights of persons to certain types of social and cultural opportunities and services and economic standards
  33. What are the legal rights?
    General positive rights,

    Traditional rights and liberties,

    Nominal "legal" rights,

    positive rights, liberties, privileges, and immunities of a limited class of persons, 

    The positive rights, liberties, privileges, and immunities of a single person
  34. General positive rights
    the rights that are enjoyed and fully assured to everyone living under a given jurisdiction or constitution.
  35. Nominal "legal" rights
    Ex. The demand of Negroes in the united states for the nominal legal right to vote, enter state schools and so forth to be translated into positive rights.
  36. Positive rights, liberties, privileges, and immunities of a limited class of persons.
    rights that are attached to membership of a given category. A demand for the destinction of rights within a political society, or citizens of a country
  37. The positive rights, liberties, privileges, and immunities of a single person
    The rights of the president of the of the united states, of the chairman of the senate; the rights of the king, or the lord chancellor, or the archbishop of Canterbury.
  38. Moral rights - List
    moral rights of one person only, the moral rights of anyone in a particular situation, the moral rights of all people in situations
  39. moral rights of one person only
    I have the moral right to be told what is going on in my own house. 

    the key to a moral right is - is there a just title?

    Justification?
  40. The moral rights of anyone in a particular situation
    • The moral right of anyone who comes into a specific category, e.g., that of a parent, or a tutor, or a au pair girl, 
    • if an individual is a member of this class heshe is entitled to so and so
  41. The moral rights of all people in all situations
    Sense these rights are so universal we should expect them to be few in number, and highly generalized in their formulation. 

    does not depend on depend in any way on the station of situation of the individual.
  42. Human rights are a form of?
    moral right
  43. It is absurd to claim it as a right
    if it is a thing that is impossible to be done.
  44. paramount importance
    duty to relieve great stress, not to give pleasure
  45. what is the right for life defined negatively via Cranston?
    to not kill someone, think paraplegic...
  46. understand the conceptual distinction between negative and positive rights
  47. The only human rights according to Cranston
    negative rights
  48. shue's main argument?
    the distinction between negative and positive is not important
  49. security right are more "positive" than they are usually thought to be. Why?
    they cost money - criminal and justice system, police academies, fire trucks etc. mos expensive right!
  50. subsistence rights are more "negative" than they are usually thought to be. Why?
    war drawing subsistence from its own people.
  51. a right to subsistence and a right to security are both basic and both equally basic. Why?
    required to enjoy life. one needs the other.
  52. right to subsistence is not a new right. Why not?
    in traditional communities they've have had a sort of welfare. A plus to being part of that community. A "social" welfare.
  53. Shue

    the right to life isn't so negative. Why?
    It costs so much.
  54. Do food shortages by themselves cause famines?
    No. food shortages don't cause famines in societies with:

    • Freedom of the press and freedom of expression
    • a multi-party democracy with an active opposition
  55. what are negative rights?
    a right to none-interference
  56. what is a positive right?
    a benefit that someone must pay for (cost)
  57. If you give the government the ability to surpress bad news?
    They Will!
  58. sen and Nussbaum agree with shu that there is no....
    important moral distinction between positive and negative right

    They believe that this is the UN should develop their rights.
  59. what are capabilities?
    • capabilities are not the same as physical resources.
    • capabilities are bot the same as satisfaction (utility). why? not
    • capabilities are abilities to do certain things (to function in certain ways)
    • capabilities are not the same as actual functioning. Why not?
  60. GDP per capita doesn't tell us what peoples lives are like BC?
    wealth distribution.
  61. Nussbaum view
    don't get throw money in their basket. Think wheelchair example
  62. if we adopt satisfaction as our guide, should we improve the health of widows or widowers?
    widowers
  63. one way to increase satisfaction?
    decrease expectations
  64. what are the three concepts of capability?
    basic capabilities, internal capabilities, combined capabilities
  65. what is a basic capability?
    for example, the ability(capability) to learn to communicate. - the innate capability.
  66. What are internal capabilities?
    the ability to have ideas to have ideas, and the ability to express them.

    the ability to develop whatever is needed
  67. what are combined capabilities?
    internal capabilities combined with suitable external condition for the exercise of the function.

    Is the environment allow you to let you be heard. for example, being ignored until you no longer have input.
  68. How many central human capabilities are there?
    10
  69. What are the central human capabilities?
    • life
    • bodily health
    • bodily integrity
    • sense, imagination
    • emotions
    • practical reason
    • affiliation: a)friendship b) respect
    • other species
    • play(the basis for a right to holidays with pay?)
    • control over ones environment a) political and b) material

    remember not only the right to vote but the capability
  70. what are natural rights?
    natural rights are moral rights that people would have no matter what their legal rights were and even if there were no government and no laws.
  71. what is the state of nature?
    a situation in which there is no government
  72. locke =
    state of nature
  73. what is a claim-right?
    there is moral enforceability! it is just, think there is no government of law
  74. What are Locke's natural rights?
    (1) a liberty-right to equal liberty (in Locke's terms, a "power") that permits one to dispose of one's person and possessions as one chooses.  (2) claim-rights not to be harmed in one's life, health, liberty, or possessions that generates corresponding duties for others not to cause such harms.    (3) Because these rights are morally enforceable, they generate further liberty-rights (in Locke's terms, "powers") of self-defense and punishment against transgressors.
  75. moral enforceability (locke)
    the right to stop someone before and after

    the right to punish

    and repress transgressors
  76. what is the law of nature? (locke)
    life, health, liberty, processions
  77. what is locke saying?
    even without laws, if I broke your arm and put your livelihood in danger, I would owe you compensation.
  78. Did locke know there was bottom up reasoning?
    NO, 17th century
  79. what is a negative people say about locke?
    that he cares to much about property, but he doesn't mean just land.

    Property = life, liberty and estate (your body)

    all of your rights in a way are property rights
  80. what are the three in conveniences of nature (locke)?
    • (1) lack of an "established, settled, known
    • law."(77) need of an impartial judge and state to enforce law. the only way you can give a state power is to voluntarily do so.

      (2) lack of a "known and indifferent [impartial] judge."(77) 

    (3) lack of enforcement power.(77)
  81. What is required for government to be legitimate?   The "consent of every individual
    Locke's theory of government legitimacy is an HISTORICAL CONSENT theory, because it is the actual consent of the citizens that makes government legitimate.   Why, according to Locke, is everyone "bound by that consent to be concluded by the majority"?  A note on Libertarian interpretations of Locke:  Locke on the "public good" or "common good" and "the good, prosperity, and safety of the society".
  82. (Locke) the minority can be bound by?
    the majority
  83. Are there rights that can't be overridden by the majority?
    Yes
  84. according to locke what makes a government legitimate?
    consent of the citizens. - agree to it. - every generation must consent.
  85. (locke) what are "public" or "common" goods?
    public goods are laws that are good for everyone.
  86. (Rawls) hypothetical consent is more important than
    actual consent
  87. Rawls's Fundamental Idea:
    The Idea of Society as a Fair System of Cooperation

    Fair terms of cooperation:  "[T]erms that each participant may reasonably accept, provided thateveryone else likewise accepts them."(
  88. (Rawls)  How are the fair terms of social cooperation to be determined?
    by coming to an agreement by fair terms of social cooperation.
  89. What information is excluded behind the Veil of Ignorance?
    the original position, fair bargaining, all of your characteristic race, social and economic status etc as to be cancelled.
  90. What are Rawl's two principles of justice?
    the liberty principle and the difference principal
  91. what are you to be accepted and denied of in the Rawls veil of ignorance?
    denied - all identifying information

    allowed - all general informative information
  92. What are Locke's basic natural rights?
    life, liberty, and property
  93. (locke) Why do men give into government?
    for protection of their property and for common law to decide controversies.
  94. (Locke) what is key to established law?
    an indifferent judge and executioner.
  95. who introduced that state of nature?
    Hobbs
  96. In hobbs' total war is their morality?
    No
  97. Does locke believe there is morality in a state of nature?
    yes
  98. what is the original position?
    viewing a position with a blank slate. think stipend example. - veil of ignorance. conception point of view to create fair ruling.
  99. Act Utilitarianism
    requires that everyone always choose the act that they believe will maximize overall happiness.  Act utilitarianism is also called direct utilitarianism, because it recommends applying the utilitarian formula directly to each act
  100. Mill's Rule/Social Practice Utilitarianism
    requires that we foster systems of laws or social practices that will maximize overall utility when people generally follow them.  Rule or social practice utilitarianism is also called indirect utilitarianism, because it does not recommend applying the utilitarian formula directly to each act.
  101. mills is what kind of utilitarian?
    social practice utilitarian.
  102. when you think moral enforceability think?
    catch the transgressors, punish the transgressors
  103. WHAT IS A RIGHT? (mills)
    "To have a right, then, is, I conceive, to have something which society ought to defend me in the possession of.  If the objector goes on to ask why it ought, I can give him no other reason than general utility." (from Utilitarianism,  p. 142)
  104. Mill’s “Very Simple Principle
    That principle is that the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number is self-protection.  That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others”(143-144).  This sounds like a libertarian principle, but Mill was not a libertarian.    Mill’s view is more complicated than the simple principle would lead you to believe.  He advocates both claim rights and liberty rights.   One general claim right:  Everyone has a claim right not to be directly harmed by others
  105. What are the liberty rights advocated by Mill?
    (1) Liberty of consciousness, including: (a) conscience; (b) thought and feeling; (c) opinion and sentiment on all subjects; (d) the liberty of expressing and publishing opinions;  (2) liberty of tastes and pursuits so long as we do not harm others, even though others should think our conduct “foolish, perverse, or wrong”(145); and  (3) the freedom “to unite for any purpose, not involving harm to others”(145).   These rights apply only to "human beings in the maturity of their faculties"[This quote is not in your selection].  The last two rights are rights against paternalism.  Paternalistic intervention = intervention to force the target to do something for his/her own good, though the target does not believe that the intervention is good for him/her.  In paternalistic intervention, the target's own judgment about what is good for him/her is overruled by the person intervening.
  106. Paternalistic intervention
    intervention to force the target to do something for his/her own good, though the target does not believe that the intervention is good for him/her.  In paternalistic intervention, the target's own judgment about what is good for him/her is overruled by the person intervening.
  107. moral enforceability
    self defense, punishment, compensation
  108. Three Kinds of Theories of Human Rights
    I.  Natural Rights Theories.  The most basic level of justification begins with some judgments of moral rightness and wrongness (that hold even in a state of nature) and uses those moral judgments as a basis for deriving human rights.(locke)

    • II.  Social Contract Theories.  All rights, even the most basic ones, are justified by some kind of consent test, usually hypothetical consent.(rawls)
    • III.  Consequentialist Theories.  All human rights, even the most basic ones, are justified by their contribution to well-being.  (Note that a rule or social practice consequentialist attempts to justify the practice or policy or institution of protecting rights, not each individual act of rights protection, on consequentialist grounds.)(mills)
  109. what is our definition of a civil right?
    it threatens the right liberty and security of a person
  110. moral relativist are?
    attempting to be nice
  111. why is someone who is no longer who is a non-relative norm of tolerance no longer a relative normist?
    bc they have made a universal claim
  112. How do you say something is wrong?
    you must be metaphysically immodest.
  113. what does metaphysically immodest mean?
    you believe in universal moral truth
  114. The western Europeans claimed to be..?
    infallible
  115. normative culture reservist can say
    that the Spanish were wrong because they are view the internal moral norms of every culture correct.
  116. the claim that what the Spanish did is..?
    metaphysically immodest
  117. epistemically immodest how is it different than metaphysically immodest?
  118. what are self-serving reasons?
    Think stacking the deck. Reasoning that benefits oneself.
  119. forcing African americans into the system is pa
    paternalistic
  120. what kind of evidence proves that something is self-serving?
    you don't care if the conclusion is true, or reason on the other side. discredited of beaten, accused of being a traitor.
  121. self-serving reasons are almost always...?
    paternalistic
  122. what is paternalistic intervention?
    the say as paternalism, but for the positive.
  123. What are two ways of moral imperialism?
    epistemic immodesty, moral paternalism
  124. you can think certain moral imperialistic things are wrong but unless you forcibly act it is not...
    moral paternalism
  125. your moral beliefs are ...
    epistemically immodest
  126. 27 - 28 you can cross them off.
  127. Objective Universality of a Moral Norm or Principle
    To understand a moral norm or principle as universal is to believe that it applies to all people and cultures, whether or not they do or would agree
  128. Objective Universality of a Particular Moral Judgment
    To understand a particular moral judgment (e.g., that the Western European treatment of the American natives was wrong) as universal is to regard it as true from any point of view, regardless of whether everyone would agre
  129. Subjective universality
    is universality based on agreement.  Human rights norms would be subjectively universal if their universality depended on their being accepted by all moral traditions or cultures.
  130. Objective universality
    is universality that does not depend on agreement.  Objectively universal human rights norms would be norms that should be respected in virtue of the characteristics we share as human beings, regardless of whether the rights are accepted by all moral traditions or cultures.
  131. jole finesberge
    claim rights, nowhere view
  132. what makes something a claim
    moral enforceability
  133. morris cranston
    he doesn't believe that there are any positive human rights only negative. social and economic are not, civil and political are.
  134. henry shue
    subsistence and security

    rights are both negative and positve

    human rights are necessary for the enjoyment of any other right
  135. ?
    famines

    what kinds of rights prevent famines, political party with an active opposition

    freedom of speech and freedom of the press
  136. nausbaum
    capabilities

    basic - innate

    internal - the capability to reason 

    combined - environment that allows
  137. lock
    state of nature

    you have natural rights in the state of nature

    right not to be harmed

    you have liberty

    except to harm yourself, or infringe on others claim rights
  138. rawls
    original position

    veil of ignorance

    ignorant of all identifying information

    unequal bargaining power
  139. john stuart mill
    utilitarism

    social practice utilitarism

    rights

    right not to be harmed

    liberty rights

    • consciousness,
    • join with others,
    • one more

    right against paternalistic intervention
  140. fallible or infallible
    means epistemically immodest
  141. gives examples along with definitions
  142. for paternalistic
    it is from the targets point of view
  143. what is the difference between a relative and a non relative norm of tolerance
    a relative norm is one that applies only to those who accept it. non relative term is one that applies to all people wheather they accept it or not.
  144. it is only by total consent that the majority may bind the minority
  145. NORMATIVE TERMS
    terms that have ACTION-GUIDING [PRESCRIPTIVE/ PROSCRIPTIVE] force.

     ought; duty; obligation; permissible; and forbidden.  When applied to actions, appropriate and inappropriate are normative terms.  [Note that not all NORMATIVE terms are MORAL terms.  For example, ought can be used in a NON-MORAL, PRUDENTIAL sense, as in:  One ought to eat nutritious foods.]  NORMATIVE MORAL TERMS are NORMATIVE TERMS with MORAL ACTION-GUIDING force.
  146. EVALUATIVE TERMS
    terms that express approval or disapproval.   

     good; bad; excellent; and awful.  EVALUATIVE TERMS can express moral approval or disapproval, but can also express other types of non-moral approval or disapproval (e.g., The statement that apples taste good is a non-moral evaluative statement).
  147. PURELY DESCRIPTIVE TERMS
    NOT NORMATIVE and NOT EVALUATIVE
  148. PURELY DESCRIPTIVE STATEMENTS
    are statements that contain only PURELY DESCRIPTIVE terms (no NORMATIVE or EVALUATIVE terms).
  149. NORMATIVE/EVALUATIVE STATEMENTS
    statements that include at least one normative/evaluative term

    For example, moral statements about what one ought or ought not to do (e.g., the statement that one ought not to steal or the statement that one ought to tell the truth) are NORMATIVE, because they contain the NORMATIVE term ought.  [Note that not all normative statements are moral. 

    contain SOME Purely Descriptive terms, but Purely Descriptive statements cannot contain ANY Normative/Evaluative terms.]
  150. Metaphysics
    Deals With The Nature Of Reality--How Things Really Are
  151. Questions of Moral Metaphysics
    Are there moral truths?  

    If so, are they universal or relative/parochial?
  152. Epistemology
    Addresses How We Can Have Knowledge Or Justified Beliefs
  153. Questions of Moral Epistemology
    If there are moral truths, can we ever have moral knowledge or justified moral beliefs?

      If so, are justified moral beliefs and moral knowledge fallible or infallible?
  154. Moral Belief

    RELIGIOUS TRADITIONS(in his special sense).
    Metaphysics:  Universal Moral Truth

    Epistemology:  Infallible Authority (e.g., sacred scripture).   Individual judgment is not encouraged; often it is forcibly suppressed.
  155. MORAL BELIEF

    THE PROOF PARADIGM (Positive Manifestation).
    Metaphysics:  Universal Moral Truth

    Epistemology:  Infallible Moral Knowledge.  Reason Discerns Self-Evident Truths and Uses Them as Premises for Infallible Proofs.  Reasoning is TopDown from Moral Principles to Particular Moral Judgments.  The Proof Paradigm is individualistic.
  156. moral norm
    a generalization that applies to all acts of a certain kind (e.g., Killing another human being is wrong.)
  157. moral principle
    a generalization that applies to a wide variety of kinds of actions (e.g., Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.)
  158. particular moral judgment
    a moral judgment about a particular actual or hypothetical case (e.g., it was wrong for Adolph Hitler to attempt to exterminate the Jews).
  159. what are the two paradigms for moral reasoning?
    top-down reasoning

    bottom-up reasoning
  160. TOP-DOWN REASONING
    Reasoning from Moral Norms or Principles and other Acceptable Premises to a Moral Judgment about a Particular Case (a Particular Moral Judgment).   

    For religious traditions with an infallible moral authority and for the Proof Paradigm, all moral reasoning is Top-Down.  Both of them require an infallible source of the fundamental moral principles (e.g., God or our Reason).
  161. THE PROCESS OF MORAL DISCOVERY PARADIGM
    Metaphysics:  Universal Moral Truth.

    Epistemology:  Fallible moral knowledge and justified moral beliefs.  

    Reasoning is Bottom-Up, from Particular Moral Judgments to Moral Principles that explain them.   Because moral principles are not self-evident, there is no presumption that they are simple principles.  Moral judgment is complicated and messy.  The Explanation/Discovery Paradigm is not individualistic.  We need each other to help us correct our moral blindspots

    On the Moral Discovery Paradigm, our Particular Moral Judgments are based on a sensitivity to moral rightness and wrongness in particular cases.  These judgments are not regarded as infallible.  On the Moral Discovery Paradigm, moral norms or principles are always regarded as fallible, because we may discover other actual or hypothetical cases that they do not explain.
  162. On the Moral Discovery Paradigm, how would we rewrite the Declaration of Independence?
    “Although for most of human history it has seemed to most people to be almost self-evident that human beings have very different capacities that justify their being treated in very different ways, we have discovered through a long process of trial and error in human social practices that all normally functioning adult human beings ought to be treated in such a way that respects certain basic and inalienable human rights. Any attempt to list these rights should be understood to be fallible and subject to correction in the future, and the interpretation given to the items on the list should also be understood to be fallible and subject to correction in the future. Our best hope is that, over time, we will gradually make progress in defining the basic human rights that should be guaranteed to all adult human beings. Right now, the best we can do is to offer the following list: . . . "
  163. NORMATIVE MORAL RELATIVISM
    Metaphysics:  Moral truths are relative (e.g., to a culture or a religious tradition)

    Epistemology:  The cultural or religious group or individual determines applicable moral truths.
  164. MORAL ANTI-REALISM/MORAL SKEPTICISM/EMOTIVISM
    Metaphysics:  No moral truths.

    Epistemology:  No moral knowledge and no rationally justified moral beliefs. 

    Moral judgments are not the product of reason. 

    They involve emotions or something else understood not to involve reasons or reasoning.   

    Views of this kind are often the negative manifestation of the Proof Paradigm.
  165. what are the two senses of right?
    • Right contrasted with wrong (as in "X is the right
    • thing to do"). This sense of 'right' conveys a simple
    • 'ought' (e.g., You ought to do X). 
  166. A right as a VALID CLAIM that one has to
    • something. This sense of 'right' conveys more than a
    • simple 'ought'. In this sense, a right involves an
    • entitlement or a claim that the right-holder is
    • permitted to enforce in some way.
    • The main idea: moral enforceability
  167. How does Feinberg's example of Nowheresville
    illustrate the difference?
  168. BUILDING ON FEINBERG'S IDEA: TWO KINDS
    OF RIGHTS
    (1) Liberty-rights 

    • Rights that make certain actions
    • permissible. If X has a liberty-right to do Y, then it is
    • morally permissible for X to do Y.

    • Like all rights, liberty-rights are assumed to be
    • morally enforceable. To say a liberty-right is
    • enforceable is to say that among the acts that it makes
    • permissible are acts of self-defense and punishment
    • against transgressors of the right 


    • (2) Claim-rights: Rights that directly generate
    • corresponding duties in others. If I have a claim right
    • that others not harm me, then other people have a
    • corresponding duty not to harm me. Like all rights,
    • claim-rights are assumed to be morally enforceable.
    • To say that they are morally enforceable is to say that
    • they include a liberty-right that permits acts of self-
    • defense and punishment against transgressors of the
    • right.
  169. LEGAL RIGHTS
    • rights that are enacted into law
    • and enforced by an institutionalized system of
    • adjudication and punishment.
  170. MORAL RIGHTS
    • would be rights to be treated in a
    • certain way, regardless of whether there is any
    • institutionalized system for enforcing them
  171. What are the four categories of rights?
    civil, political, economic, and social
  172. according to cranston there are significant differences between?
    • traditional political and civil
    • rights (the first twenty) and the new economic and
    • social rights (the next ten).
  173. According to Cranston, there are significant
    differences between the traditional political and civil
    rights?

    what are the significant differences?
    • 1. Universality
    • 2. Paramount Importance
    • 3. Morally compelling vs. a utopian aspiration
    • 4. Rights against government (or other)

    interference vs. rights to a benefit
  174. what are negative right?
    rights to non-interference

    gives rise to positive duties
  175. Positive Rights
    rights to some benefit that must be paid for by someone. 

    give rise to positive duties
  176. how does shue make the distinction of positive and negative rights?
    • The most basic rights include both negative and
    • positive elements. There is no clear or important line
    • between them.
  177. what is the main issue raised by Cranston?
    are there any morally compelling universal, positive (as opposed to negative) rights of paramount importance?
  178. What is Shue's most important rights?
    Rights to Security and Subsistence.
  179. Shue) What are rights?
    • [J]ustified demands for social
    • guarantees against standard threats.
  180. Shue) What are basic rights?
    • Rights that are necessary to
    • the actual exercise/enjoyment/fulfillment of all other
    • rights.
  181. Shue) What is security?
    • Protection against certain serious
    • kinds of harms.
  182. What is subsistence?
    • [U]npolluted air, unpolluted
    • water, adequate food, adequate clothing, adequate
    • shelter, and minimal preventive public health care. . .
    • . [A] decent chance at a reasonably healthy and
    • active life of more or less normal length, barring
    • tragic interventions.
  183. Shue) To whom does the right to subsistence apply?
    • at least to those who
    • cannot provide for themselves
  184. what does Shue emphasize?
    the importance of rights to non-interference in guaranteeing subsistence
  185. Shue's response to Cranston?
    • 1. Security rights are more "positive" than they are
    • usually thought to be. Why?

    • 2. Subsistence rights are more "negative" than they
    • are usually thought to be. Why?

    • 3. A right to subsistence and a right to security are
    • both basic and both equally basic. Why?

    4. Right to subsistence is not a new right. Why not?
  186. Sen
    • path-breaking
    • work on famines
  187. Sen) Food shortages don't
    cause famines in societies with:
    • (1) freedom of the press and freedom of expression
    • [provides information];

    • (2) a multi-party democracy with an active opposition
    • [provides political motivation]
  188. what does Shue emphasize?
    • the importance of viewing
    • subsistence rights not in terms of the providing of a
    • benefit, but rather as providing an opportunity
  189. Nussbaum's significance
    Rights as Rights to the Central Human Capabilities
  190. What
    is it that rights are rights to?
    capabilities 

    not 

    • physical resources
    • (such as money or GNP per capita), satisfaction
    • (utility), actual functioning.
  191. What are capabilities?
    Capabilities are not the same as physical resources such as money 

    Capabilities are not the same as satisfaction (utility). 

    • Capabilities are abilities to do certain things (to
    • function in certain ways). 

    • Capabilities are not the same as actual functioning?
    • Why not?
  192. Basic capabilities
    • the innate equipment of
    • individuals that is necessary for developing the more
    • advanced capability
  193. Internal capabilities
    • states of the person herself that
    • are, as far as the person is concerned, sufficient
    • conditions for the exercise of the requisite functions
  194. Combined capabilities
    • internal capabilities
    • combined with suitable external conditions for the
    • exercise of the function
  195. what are the 10 central human capabilities?
    • 1. Life (contrast with Cranston)
    • 2. Bodily health
    • 3. Bodily integrity
    • 4. Sense, imagination, and thought
    • 5. Emotions

    • 6. Practical Reason
    • 7. Affiliation: (a) Friendship and

    • (b) Respect.
    • 8. Other species

    • 9. Play (the basis for a right to holidays with pay?)
    • 10. Control over one's environment:

    (a) Political and (b) Material
  196. Understanding Rights as Rights to Capabilities
    • 1. Rights. Rights involve "an especially urgent
    • and morally justified claim that a person has, simply
    • by virtue of being a human adult, and independently
    • of membership in a particular nation, or class, or sex,
    • or ethnic or religious or sexual group." (p. 228)

    • 2. Rights to Capabilities. Nussbaum believes
    • that thinking of rights in terms of capabilities helps to
    • understand both civil and political rights and
    • economic and social rights. Why?
  197. What are Natural Rights?
    • Natural rights are moral rights that people would
    • have no matter what their legal rights were and even
    • if there were no government and no laws.
  198. Locke) State of Nature
    • situation in which there is no
    • government.
  199. What are Locke's natural rights?
    • (1) a liberty-right to equal liberty (in Locke's terms, a
    • "power") that permits one to dispose of one's person
    • and possessions as one chooses, subject to two
    • constraints: (1) no destruction of oneself; (2) no
    • violations of the claim-rights of others.

    • (2) claim-rights not to be harmed in one's life, health,
    • liberty, or possessions that generates corresponding
    • duties for others not to cause such harms.

    • (3) Because these rights are morally enforceable, they
    • generate further liberty-rights (in Locke's terms,
    • "powers") of self-defense and other-defense (to
    • “preserve the innocent and restrain offenders”), of
    • punishment of transgressors (73), and also a right to
    • reparations for harm (though this is not included in
    • the brief selection in your course reader).
  200. Why, according to Locke, will people in a State of
    Nature consent to limitations on their rights required
    to establish some kind of democratic government?
    • [T]he enjoyment of property [lives, liberties,
    • and estates] is very unsafe, very insecure.”(76) Three
    • reasons:

    • (1) lack of an “established, settled, known
    • law.”(77)

    • (2) lack of a “known and indifferent [impartial]
    • judge.”(77)

    (3) lack of enforcement power.(77)
  201. According to Locke, What is the Only Source of
    Morally Justifiable Political Authority—
    That Is, What is Required for a Government to be
    Legitimate?
    The “consent of every individual”

    • Locke’s theory of government legitimacy is an
    • HISTORICAL CONSENT theory, because it is the
    • actual consent of the citizens that makes government
    • legitimate.
  202. RAWLS'S SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY
    • HYPOTHETICAL CONSENT ACCOUNT
    • OF RIGHTS 
  203. Hypothetical consent accounts make the
    • justifiability of a system of government dependent on
    • whether it would be consented to under appropriate
    • circumstances.
  204. Rawls) HYPOTHETICAL CONSENT 

    What are the appropriate
    circumstances?
    • Fair terms of cooperation: "[T]erms that each
    • participant may reasonably accept, provided that
    • everyone else likewise accepts them."(16
  205. What is Rawl's fundamental idea?
    • The Idea of Society
    • as a Fair System of Cooperation
  206. What is Rawls' Original Position?
    Basically behind the veil of ignorance.
  207. What information is excluded behind the Veil of
    Ignorance?
    all identifying information
  208. what are Rawls' two principals of justice:
    • Liberty principal 
    • includes the basic liberty
    • rights that Rawls believes would be unanimously
    • agreed to in the Original Position 




    difference principal
  209. John Stewart Mill's significance
    The Greatest Happiness Principle 

    • [A]ctions are
    • right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness;
    • wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of
    • happiness.
  210. DIRECT (ACT) UTILITARIANISM VS.
    INDIRECT (RULE/SOCIAL PRACTICE)
    UTILITARIANISM
    • Act Utilitarianism requires that everyone always
    • choose the act that they believe will maximize overall
    • happiness. 
    • Act utilitarianism is also called direct
    • utilitarianism, because it recommends applying
    • the
    • utilitarian formula directly to each act.


    • Mill's Rule/Social Practice Utilitarianism requires
    • that we foster systems of laws or social practices that
    • will maximize overall utility when people generally
    • follow them. Rule or social practice utilitarianism is
    • also called indirect utilitarianism, because it does not
    • recommend applying the utilitarian formula directly
    • to each act.
  211. What is the utilitarian formula?
    the greatest happiness of the greatest number
  212. What is utility as it pertains to Mill/utilitarianism
    usually defined as maximizing total benefit and reducing suffering or the negatives
  213. Mill) Act utilitarian - Whenever a government can produce
    more overall utility by violating a right, should it do so?
    Yes
  214. rule/social practice Utilitarian
    • A rule/social practice utilitarian such as Mill would
    • disagree. Mill argues that overall 
    • Whenever a government can produce
    • more overall utility by violating a right, it should do
    • so. 
  215. A rule/social practice utilitarian such as Mill would
    • disagree. Mill argues that overall utility is greater
    • when governments respect certain liberty rights, even
    • when they think that violating them will produce
    • more overall utility.
  216. Mills/utilitarism)  To have a right, then, is
    • to have
    • something which society ought to defend me in the
    • possession of. If the objector goes on to ask why it
    • ought, I can give him no other reason than general
    • utility.
  217. Where is the element of moral enforceability in
    Mill’s definition?
  218. what is utilitarianism?
    the doctrine that actions are right if they are useful or for the benefit of a majority.the doctrine that an action is right insofar as it promotes happiness, and that the greatest happiness of the greatest number should be the guiding principle of conduct.
  219. Mill's Theory of Rights
    • a right is an individual claim C or liberty L
    • that satisfies the following condition: 
  220. If society follows the policy of preventing and
    • punishing violations of claim C [or liberty L], there
    • will be more overall utility than if society follows any
    • other policy 
  221. The
    • policy of not allowing governments to violate certain
    • basic rights even when they believe that violating
    • them will produce more overall utility is itself a
    • policy that can be evaluated on the basis of its overall
    • utility. Mill believes that that policy will produce
    • more overall utility than the policy of allowing
    • governments to violate the basic rights when they
    • believe that violating them will produce more overall
    • utility.
  222. Mill’s “Very Simple Principle”
    • that the sole end for which
    • mankind are warranted, individually or collectively,
    • in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their
    • number is self-protection. That the only purpose for
    • which power can be rightfully exercised over any
    • member of a civilized community, against his will, is
    • to prevent harm to others”
  223. Mill) one general claim right?
    • Everyone has a claim right not to be directly harmed
    • by others.
  224. What are the liberty rights advocated by Mill?
    • (1) Liberty of consciousness, including:
    • (a) conscience; (b) thought and feeling; (c) opinion
    • and sentiment on all subjects; (d) the liberty of
    • expressing and publishing opinions;
    • (2) liberty of tastes and pursuits so long as we do not
    • harm others, even though others should think our
    • conduct “foolish, perverse, or wrong”(145); and
    • (3) the freedom “to unite for any purpose, not
    • involving harm to others”(145).

    • These rights apply only to "human beings in the
    • maturity of their faculties"[This quote is not in your
    • selection]. 

    The last two rights are rights against paternalism.
  225. Paternalistic intervention
    • intervention to force the
    • target to do something for his/her own good, though
    • the target does not believe that the intervention is
    • good for him/her. 
  226. In paternalistic intervention, the
    • target's own judgment about what is good for him/her
    • is overruled by the person intervening.
  227. Three kinds of theories of Human rights
    Natural rights, social contract theories, consequentialist theories
  228. natural right theories
    • The most basic level of
    • justification begins with some judgments of moral
    • rightness and wrongness (that hold even in a state of
    • nature) and uses those moral judgments as a basis for
    • deriving human rights.
  229. Social Contract Theories
    • All rights, even the
    • most basic ones, are justified by some kind of
    • consent test, usually hypothetical consent.
  230. Consequentialist Theories
    • All human rights,
    • even the most basic ones, are justified by their
    • contribution to well-being. (Note that a rule or social
    • practice consequentialist attempts to justify the
    • practice or policy or institution of protecting rights,
    • not each individual act of rights protection, on
    • consequentialist grounds.)
  231. Moral Absolutism
    is the ethical belief that there are absolute standards against which moral questions can be judged, and that certain actions are right or wrong, regardless of the context of the act.
  232. Moral relativism
    the view that moral judgments are true or false only relative to some particular standpoint (for instance, that of a culture or a historical period) and that no standpoint is uniquely privileged over all others.
  233. Normative Cultural Absolutism About Morality
    (NCA)
    • The view that the norms of one culture
    • (typically one’s own) are infallible and universal—
    • that is, they apply to all cultures
  234. Descriptive Cultural Relativism About Morality
    • the purely descriptive claim that different societies or
    • cultures disagree on at least some moral judgments.
  235. what is the difference between a claim and a right?
  236. Metaethical Relativism
  237. moral anti-realism or
    • moral skepticism = the claim that there are no moral
    • truths (moral anti-realism) or that human beings can
    • never have any moral knowledge or any justified
    • moral beliefs (moral skepticism).
  238. Normative Cultural Relativism About Morality
    • The normative moral claim that people ought to
    • comply with the moral norms of their own culture
    • (or, at least, that it is always morally permissible for
    • them to do so).
  239. Important Fact:
    • Everyone, even the Normative
    • Cultural Absolutist, can agree that descriptive
    • cultural relativism about morality is true. 

    • Second, Normative Cultural Absolutism includes
    • both a metaphysical element and an epistemological
    • element.
  240. EPISTEMIC IMMODESTY [Moral Infallibilism]
    A claim to certainty or infallibility.
  241. EPISTEMIC MODESTY [Moral Fallibilism]
    • An
    • acknowledgment of fallibility and the lack of
    • certainty.
  242. METAPHYSICAL IMMODESTY
    • A claim that
    • some moral judgments are objectively universal—
    • that is, they apply to all moral beings, regardless of
    • whether they agree.
  243. METAPHYSICAL MODESTY
    • A claim that no
    • moral judgments are objectively universal. This
    • covers Moral Anti-Realism, Moral Skepticism, and
    • all forms of unqualified Normative Moral Relativism.
    • There are many varieties of normative moral
    • relativism—for example, the claim that our moral
    • principles only apply to members of our own species
    • or our own linguistic community or own religion or
    • to those who accept our moral principles, etc.
  244. Objectivity
    the state or quality of being true even outside of a subject's individual biases, interpretations, feelings, and imaginings
  245. Normative Cultural
    Relativism 

    The three central propositions of the AAA Statement:
    • 1. The individual realizes his personality through his
    • culture, hence respect for individual differences
    • entails a respect for cultural differences.

    • 2. Respect for difference between cultures is
    • validated by the scientific fact that no technique of
    • qualitatively evaluating cultures has been discovered.







    • 3. Standards and values are relative to the culture
    • from which they derive so that any attempt to
    • formulate postulates that grow out of the beliefs or
    • moral codes of one culture must to that extent detract
    • from the applicability of any Declaration of Human
    • Rights to mankind as a whole.

    • Proposition 3 is a version of normative cultural
    • relativism about morality. In support of it, the AAA
    • offered a version of what we will call "the cultural
    • imperialism argument."
  246. The Cultural Imperialism Argument
  247. There are many different versions of this
    • argument. What they all have in common is that they
    • begin from the claim that it was wrong for the
    • Western Europeans to impose their moral and
    • religious norms on the American natives and they
    • conclude with an endorsement of Normative Cultural
    • Relativism (NCR).
  248. Cultural imperialism
    defined as the cultural aspects of imperialism. Imperialism, here, is referring to the creation and maintenance of unequal relationships between civilizations favoring the more powerful civilization.
  249. LOGICAL FLAW IN THE CULTURAL
    IMPERIALISM ARGUMENT
    • Important facts about the Cultural
    • Imperialism Argument:

    • (1) The Cultural Imperialism Argument is
    • incompatible with Moral Anti-Realism and /Moral
    • Skepticism. Why?

    • (2) Although the Cultural Imperialism Argument has
    • undeniable moral appeal, it is deeply incoherent. Its
    • conclusion (NCR) is incompatible with the claim that
    • cultural imperialism is morally objectionable. To see
    • why, consider the example of the Spanish Colonist
    • and the American Native.
  250. The Spanish Colonist does not
    believe that all moral views are equally valid? Is the
    Spanish Colonist's view equally as valid as the view
    that all moral views are equally valid?
    • Two ways out: The Relativist Response: The view
    • that all moral points of view are equally valid is only
    • true for those who accept it.

    • The Non-Relativist Way Out: The Spanish Colonist
    • is mistaken in claiming that only his moral view is
    • valid.
  251. Two Norms of Tolerance
    • A Relative Norm of Tolerance: I should be tolerant
    • of other cultures, because my culture has a norm of
    • tolerance, but that the norm of tolerance does not
    • apply to cultures that do not have such a norm. This
    • view holds that there is only a relative duty to be
    • tolerant of other cultures. It only applies to cultures
    • that have it. This is the only duty of tolerance that
    • normative cultural relativism about morality could
    • ever justify. 
  252. An alternative to A Relative Norm of Tolerance
    • would be a Non-Relative Norm of Tolerance. To
    • formulate such a norm, it is helpful to introduce some
    • useful distinctions.
  253. Internal interactions or practices
    • interactions or
    • practices that involve only members of the same
    • culture.
  254. External interactions or practices
    • are interactions or
    • practices that involve members of different cultures.
  255. An internal norm
    • a norm of a culture that applies to
    • the culture's internal interactions or practices.
  256. An external norm
    • a norm of a culture that applies
    • to the culture's external interactions or practices.
  257. A Non-Relative Norm of Tolerance
    • That the
    • members of each culture should follow their own
    • internal norms (or at least it is morally permissible
    • for them to do so) and that all cultures (whether or
    • not they accept a norm of tolerance) should tolerate
    • (not interfere with or attempt to change) other
    • cultures' internal norms. This view holds that there is
    • a non-relative duty to be tolerant of other cultures'
    • internal norms. It applies even to cultures that have a
    • norm of intolerance toward other cultures.

    • The discovery of a non-relative norm of
    • tolerance enables us to formulate a new, qualified
    • form of moral relativism:
  258. Norms (NCRAIN)
    • the claim every culture ought to
    • respect every other culture's internal moral norms 
  259. Notice one striking fact about NCRAIN: It is
    metaphysically immodest.
  260. Combining Metaphysical Immodesty With Epistemic
    Modesty: How is it Possible?
    • 1. A universal moral standpoint: The original
    • position behind the veil of ignorance. A standpoint
    • from which to make fallible but universal particular
    • moral judgments.

    • 2. An example of taking the universal moral
    • standpoint to evaluate an external norm:

    • a. Las Casas' criticism of the Western European
    • treatment treatment of the American natives.

    • 3. The role of empathic understanding and bottom-
    • up reasoning in moral judgment. Las Casas believed
    • that moral reasoning was top-down, but we can see
    • how it makes sense to think that his moral reasoning
    • was actually bottom-up.

    • The wrongness of slavery was not self-evident to
    • Las Casas.

    • 4. How moral blindspots can be supported by
    • socially enforced, self-serving reasons.

    • When a justification for a conclusion is self-serving,
    • it is not the case that the conclusion is accepted
    • because the justification is accepted; rather, the
    • causal relation is reversed, and the justification is
    • accepted (at least in part) because it supports the
    • desired conclusion, one that it is in one’s interest to
    • believe.

    • Examples from the debate between Las Casas and
    • Sepulveda; Dred Scott; Senator James O. Eastland.

    • What do all of these self-serving reasons have in
    • common? They are paternalistic.

    • Why is there no logical test for when a justification is
    • self-serving?

    • What kind of evidence indicates that a justification
    • may well be self-serving?

    • What kind of evidence indicates that a self-serving
    • justification is socially enforced?
  261. A universal moral standpoint:
    • The original
    • position behind the veil of ignorance. A standpoint
    • from which to make fallible but universal particular
    • moral judgments.
  262. When a justification for a conclusion is self-serving
    • it is not the case that the conclusion is accepted
    • because the justification is accepted; rather, the
    • causal relation is reversed, and the justification is
    • accepted (at least in part) because it supports the
    • desired conclusion, one that it is in one’s interest to
    • believe 

    think stacking the deck. individual only gives justification for his desired outcome
  263. What do all of these self-serving reasons have in
    common
    They are all paternalistic
  264. HOW TO AVOID BOTH NORMATIVE MORAL
    RELATIVISM AND MORAL IMPERIALISM
    Paternalistic intervention 

    Moral Imperialism
  265. Moral Imperialism
    • the view of someone who holds
    • either that anyone who disagrees with me on a moral
    • question is mistaken (epistemic immodesty) or that I
    • am permitted to intervene paternalistically to force
    • others to act in accordance with my moral views for
    • their own good (moral paternalism).
  266. A simple example of a position that is metaphysically
    immodest but not morally imperialistic: the
    epistemically modest advocate of the following as a
    universal moral norm: "Moral imperialism is always
    wrong."
  267. who might have been the first first proponent of NCRAIN?
    Las Casas
  268. Why is NCRAIN not compatible with an individual right of freedom of religion?
  269. Objective Universality of a Moral Norm or Principle
  270. To understand a moral norm or principle as universal
    • is to believe that it applies to all people and cultures,
    • whether or not they do or would agree.
  271. Objective Universality of a Particular Moral
    Judgment
    • To understand a particular moral
    • judgment (e.g., that the Western European treatment
    • of the American natives was wrong) as universal is to
    • regard it as true from any point of view, regardless of
    • whether everyone would agree.
  272. Subjective universality
    • universality based on
    • agreement. Human rights norms would be
    • subjectively universal if their universality depended
    • on their being accepted by all moral traditions or
    • cultures.
  273. Objective universality
    • universality that does not
    • depend on agreement. Objectively universal human
    • rights norms would be norms that should be
    • respected in virtue of the characteristics we share as
    • human beings, regardless of whether the rights are
    • accepted by all moral traditions or cultures
  274. Why NCRAIN could never support objectively
    universal internal human rights norms
    • Charles Taylor's hope for an "overlapping
    • consensus" where different moral traditions would
    • give different justifications based on different
    • fundamental principles and values for roughly the
    • same internal rights norms, which all moral
    • traditions would agree on.

    • The good news: The prospects for an
    • overlapping consensus on internal rights norms are
    • better than you might have thought: Many different
    • traditions have been hospitable to some of the main
    • human rights ideas.

    • (a) Taylor on Reform Buddhism;
    • (b) Wiredu on Akan society;
  275. Wollstonecraft) the books on education written by men say
    that woman shouldn't receive education
  276. ameal
    the ideal education for a man or woman
  277. what is a masculine woman?
    a woman that is unattractive to men. unmarriageable
  278. Wollstonecraft) why men where hypocritical
    they downed a monarch then come home to their castle as a monarch.
  279. Why didn't these mean listen?
    They had self serving reasons.
  280. Wollstonecraft) let them develop their capabilities
    how do you know if they are not given a chance
  281. limits of education that don't allow people to question the education because they are not educated.
  282. what is due process
    what is fair and what is not. constitutional fairness.
  283. what is the incorporation doctrine?
    when the bill or rights (first 10 amendments) are being applied to the states
  284. prior restraint -  stopping something before it is published. (national defense)

    defamation - after something is published

What would you like to do?

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview