Overlapping consensus view of human rights: a Rawlsian conception

IF 2.2 1区社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS International Theory Pub Date : 2022-10-21 DOI:10.1017/S1752971922000124

R. Herr

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This paper advances and defends the overlapping consensus view of human rights (OCV) as a political conception of human rights most consistent with John Rawls's normative account of a realistic utopia at the international level. Although some clues exist in The Law of Peoples to support this view, an innovative reconstruction is called for to complete the picture. This paper aims to offer such a reconstruction, which is predicated on two premises: first, the parties to the international original positions, which include decent nonliberal peoples (DNPs), are reasonable and worthy of liberal toleration; and, second, the protection of human rights proper is a module that can fit into all acceptable comprehensive doctrines at the international level, including societal comprehensive doctrines in DNPs. The first premise has been subjected to vehement liberal critiques and left for dead, and the second premise has not been taken seriously and relatively neglected. This paper defends these premises in turn to justify the OCV as constitutive of Rawls's normative account of a realistic utopia at the international level.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

重叠共识的人权观:罗尔斯式的概念

摘要本文提出并捍卫了重叠共识人权观，认为这是一种最符合约翰·罗尔斯在国际层面上对现实乌托邦的规范描述的人权政治概念。尽管《人民法》中有一些线索支持这一观点，但需要进行创新的重建来完成这一图景。本文旨在提供这样一种重建，其前提有两个：第一，国际原始立场的当事方，包括体面的非自由主义人民，是合理的，值得自由容忍；第二，保护人权本身是一个模块，可以纳入国际一级所有可接受的全面理论，包括DNP中的社会全面理论。第一个前提遭到了自由主义者的强烈批评，并被束之高阁；第二个前提没有得到重视，也相对被忽视。本文反过来为这些前提辩护，以证明OCV是罗尔斯在国际层面上对现实乌托邦的规范性描述的组成部分。

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

International Theory Multiple-

CiteScore

6.60

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Editorial board International Theory (IT) is a peer reviewed journal which promotes theoretical scholarship about the positive, legal, and normative aspects of world politics respectively. IT is open to theory of absolutely all varieties and from all disciplines, provided it addresses problems of politics, broadly defined and pertains to the international. IT welcomes scholarship that uses evidence from the real world to advance theoretical arguments. However, IT is intended as a forum where scholars can develop theoretical arguments in depth without an expectation of extensive empirical analysis. IT’s over-arching goal is to promote communication and engagement across theoretical and disciplinary traditions. IT puts a premium on contributors’ ability to reach as broad an audience as possible, both in the questions they engage and in their accessibility to other approaches. This might be done by addressing problems that can only be understood by combining multiple disciplinary discourses, like institutional design, or practical ethics; or by addressing phenomena that have broad ramifications, like civilizing processes in world politics, or the evolution of environmental norms. IT is also open to work that remains within one scholarly tradition, although in that case authors must make clear the horizon of their arguments in relation to other theoretical approaches.

期刊最新文献

Trilateral politics in hierarchy, war, and state formation Trilateral politics in hierarchy, war, and state formation Law and politics from the sea ‘Getting Asia right’: de-essentializing China's hegemony in historical Asia Global international relations and the essentialism trap