1,721,103 research outputs found

    What moral theory for human rights? Naturalization vs. denaturalization

    No full text
    The United Nations universal declaration of 1948 celebrated the belief in human rights as a great moral value. But what does ‘the belief in human rights’ precisely mean? What exactly are human rights? Admitting that human rights exist may cause difficulties for certain moral thoeries and raise various questions. Some questions concern the problem of the justification of human rights: are these grounded on nature, that is on something unalterable and absolute, or are they the product of history and social life? The various theories of human rights answer these questions differently. This paper, therefore, examines the controversial question of the justification of human rights by comparing the two main forms of argument which are developed by the predominate theories of human rights: naturalization and denaturalization. After showing the advantages and disadvantages of these rival arguments, the author draws some conclusions regarding the issue of justification of concepts, such as the concept of human rights, on which our present social life appears to be intrinsically based

    Il Confine permeabile. La negoziazione del confine animali-umani

    Full text link
    The paper is devoted to a re-examination of the issue of the Human-Animal boundary in the light of the idea that the boundary has been renegotiated every time humans has perceived a challenge to their supremacy in the hierarchy of beings. By making reference to the Darwinian framework and also to the reflections developed by the philosopher and anthropologist Raymond Corbey in his book The Methaphysics of Apes. Negotiating the Animal-Human Boundary, the paper invites to focus the attention to the necessity of reestablishing some balance between humans and animals by doing reference to the quality of life of all living beings
    corecore