Unalienable Rights and Some Libertarians

Q4 Social Sciences Perspectives on Political Science Pub Date : 2021-10-14 DOI:10.1080/10457097.2021.1982608
C. J. Wolfe
{"title":"Unalienable Rights and Some Libertarians","authors":"C. J. Wolfe","doi":"10.1080/10457097.2021.1982608","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The idea that all human beings are endowed with unalienable rights is a core element of America’s public philosophy going back to the Declaration of Independence. But it is increasingly clear that many Americans have abandoned the idea that some rights are unalienable- especially, I would argue, libertarians. Given the prevalence of libertarianism in our culture, an important question is whether all libertarians logically ought to reject unalienable rights given their philosophical anthropology. What I propose to do in this article is three things: First, I will introduce and give a definition for “unalienable rights” by reviewing the recent proceedings of the State Department’s Commission on Unalienable Rights. Second, I will show why the concept of unalienable rights is generally incompatible with the libertarian philosophical anthropology. Third, I will survey the writings of specific libertarian philosophers, economists, and law professors to consider whether they believe in unalienable rights. This will allow us to better understand the status of unalienable rights in America today.","PeriodicalId":55874,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Political Science","volume":"51 1","pages":"1 - 6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10457097.2021.1982608","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The idea that all human beings are endowed with unalienable rights is a core element of America’s public philosophy going back to the Declaration of Independence. But it is increasingly clear that many Americans have abandoned the idea that some rights are unalienable- especially, I would argue, libertarians. Given the prevalence of libertarianism in our culture, an important question is whether all libertarians logically ought to reject unalienable rights given their philosophical anthropology. What I propose to do in this article is three things: First, I will introduce and give a definition for “unalienable rights” by reviewing the recent proceedings of the State Department’s Commission on Unalienable Rights. Second, I will show why the concept of unalienable rights is generally incompatible with the libertarian philosophical anthropology. Third, I will survey the writings of specific libertarian philosophers, economists, and law professors to consider whether they believe in unalienable rights. This will allow us to better understand the status of unalienable rights in America today.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不可剥夺权利与一些自由主义者
摘要所有人都被赋予不可剥夺的权利,这是美国公共哲学的核心要素,可以追溯到《独立宣言》。但越来越明显的是,许多美国人已经放弃了一些权利是不可剥夺的想法,尤其是我认为的自由主义者。鉴于自由意志主义在我们文化中的盛行,一个重要的问题是,鉴于他们的哲学人类学,是否所有自由意志主义者都应该在逻辑上拒绝不可剥夺的权利。我在这篇文章中建议做三件事:首先,我将通过回顾国务院不可剥夺权利委员会最近的会议记录,介绍并给出“不可剥夺的权利”的定义。其次,我将展示为什么不可剥夺权利的概念通常与自由主义哲学人类学不兼容。第三,我将调查特定自由主义哲学家、经济学家和法学教授的著作,以考虑他们是否相信不可剥夺的权利。这将使我们更好地了解当今美国不可剥夺权利的现状。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Perspectives on Political Science
Perspectives on Political Science Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Whether discussing Montaigne"s case for tolerance or Nietzsche"s political critique of modern science, Perspectives on Political Science links contemporary politics and culture to the enduring questions posed by great thinkers from antiquity to the present. Ideas are the lifeblood of the journal, which comprises articles, symposia, and book reviews. Recent articles address the writings of Aristotle, Adam Smith, and Plutarch; the movies No Country for Old Men and 3:10 to Yuma; and the role of humility in modern political thought.
期刊最新文献
Paul & Empire Criticism: Why and How? Paul & Empire Criticism: Why and How? by Najeeb T. Haddad, Cascade Books, Publication Date: 2023 Conversation as Political Education Defending Socrates: Political Philosophy Before the Tribunal of Science Defending Socrates: Political Philosophy Before the Tribunal of Science , by Alex Priou, Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press, 184 pp., ISBN 978-0-88146-914-1, Publication Date: 2023 The Politics of Suicide: Miasma and Katharmos in Plato’s Political Thought “Worse than Nothing: The Dangerous Fallacy of Originalism,” by Erwin Chemerinsky
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1