Rights, Obligations, Priorities
In Justice: Rights and Wrongs Nicholas Wolterstorff argues for the priority of rights over obligations, and suggests that assigning priority to obligations will take too little account of the wrongs suffered by many types of victim. In this comment on the book I suggest various reasons for assigning...
| Autore principale: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo di documento: | Elettronico Articolo |
| Lingua: | Inglese |
| Verificare la disponibilità: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Caricamento...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Pubblicazione: |
Sage
2010
|
| In: |
Studies in Christian ethics
Anno: 2010, Volume: 23, Fascicolo: 2, Pagine: 163-171 |
| Altre parole chiave: | B
Rights
B Obligations B impaired agency B Agents B Kant |
| Accesso online: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Edizione parallela: | Elettronico
|
| Riepilogo: | In Justice: Rights and Wrongs Nicholas Wolterstorff argues for the priority of rights over obligations, and suggests that assigning priority to obligations will take too little account of the wrongs suffered by many types of victim. In this comment on the book I suggest various reasons for assigning priority to obligations, emphasise the importance of offering an account of imperfect as well as perfect obligations, and question the reading of Immanuel Kant’s Groundwork on which some of Wolterstorff’s arguments against the priority of obligations rely. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0953-9468 |
| Comprende: | Enthalten in: Studies in Christian ethics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1177/0953946809359468 |