Rights and Borderline Cases
Jeffrie G. Murphy
Arizona State University College of Law
Arizona Law Review, Vol. 19, p. 228, 1977
Two competing theories of justice are currently dominating discussion within contemporary Anglo-American moral, social, political, and legal philosophy: John Rawls Welfare-State Liberal theory based on the partial redistribution of wealth within society and Robert Nozick’s Libertarian theory based upon the claims that justice is the respecting of people’s rights. This article explores the concept of a right. It is based on the assumption that one way to develop an understanding of this important moral concept is to examine cases where the ascription of rights seems doubtful. If we can understand what goes wrong in the doubtful cases, then perhaps we can develop a more satisfactory account of the clear cases. This article may be viewed as a tentative start toward showing that a generally Rawlsian theory of justice or rights can make an important place for those moral claims which Nozick calls entitlements.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 14
Keywords: Theory of Justice, John Rawls, Robert NozickAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: August 27, 2009
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.266 seconds