universal relative relative universality
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTIONTHE RELATIVE UNIVERSALITY OF HUMAN RIGHTS and CONDITIONS OF AN UNFORCED CONSENSUS ON HUMAN JACK DONNELLY CHARLES TAYLOR. Universal Relative Relative universality Limits of the universality Conceptual universality - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
HR international debates
THE RELATIVE UNIVERSALITY OF HUMAN RIGHTSandCONDITIONS OF AN UNFORCED CONSENSUS ON HUMAN
JACK DONNELLYCHARLES TAYLOR
UniversalRelativeRelative universalityLimits of the universality
Conceptual universalityHuman rights are "universal" rights which are held "universally" by all human rights.Substantive universality
Norm creation has been internationalized. Enforcement is left to sovereign states.
Most society have practiced human rights through their history.
No concrete practice or vision of individual human rights before 17th century.
Any society other than Western society did not develop human rights ideas before 20th century
First human rights idea formed in the modern westJohn LockeIdeas arose from social, economic, and political transformation of modernitySo, We must deal with market economies and bureaucratic states.We all need equal and inalienable universal human rights to protect us from them.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Most states accept the declaration.
Human rights are chosen over competing conceptions of national political legitimacy.
John Rawls"Comprehensive religious, philosophical, or moral doctrines""Political conception of justice"Varieties of doctrines in Human rightsEven "Asian values" are regarded to support human rights.In principle,Varieties of social practices (except for HR) can be the basis for achieving founder mental equal values.In practice,HR preferred option.
Concensus among nations over the Universal Declaration was largely voluntary decision.
>= having single moral code on human rights
3 problems of ontological universalityIt is impossible to involve those who belong to other religion or philosophies.Prominent doctorines have ignored or denied human rights in their history.It would regards that all moral and religious theories as false or immoral.
= cultures differ across the time and spaceMethodological cultural relativismSubstantive cultural relativismCulture provides absolute standards of evaluation
6 problems of substantive cultural relativismRisking reducing "right" to "traditional," " good" to "old" and "obligatory" to habitual
= mutual recognition of people and states in an international community.
Justice - self-determinationOrder - sovergenity
= new stream of relativist (anti-universalist)
=not only defensible but also desirable
Human rights are relatively universal at the level of the concept.
Particular rights concepts have multiple defensible conceptions.
Particular conceptions will have many defensible implementations.
Islamic law prohibits Muslims to change their religionCompatible with Article 18(Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.)Freedom does not mean becoming religious neutrality.No guarantee of changing religion without costHowever, executing is not permitted.
Human rights seek to allow human beings to pursue their own visions of the good life.
faulse universalismWhen a powerful actor is seeking own interests for universal values.To prevent such arrogant universalismInternational legal universalityOverlapping consensus universality
CHARLES TAYLORBorn in 1931 (He is now 82 years old)Canadian philosopher from Montreal, QuebecWas a professor of political philosophy at McGill UniversityRoman CatholicInfluenced by Aristote, Hegel, Tocqueville, etc.,
Unforced International Consensuson Human Rights
John Rawls overlapping consensusThis idea was already expressed by Jacques Maritain in 1949: the way of justifying belief in the rights of man and the ideal of liberty, equality, fraternity is the only way with a firm foundation in truth. Is this kind of consensus POSSIBLE?14SUBJECTIVE RIGHTSConcepts 1) Played a big role in medieval societies: formed the basis of a philosophical view of humans and their society. 2) Was the basis of the rewriting of Natural Law theory into Fundamental Law in 17C. Two are connected: the force of the underlying philosophy promotes constantly the legal norm in our politico-legal systems. Governments in different legislation levels can get out from the conflict with these fundamental rights.
LAW (resolved by legal innovation)
HIERARCHY AND IDENTITY
16SECOND CONFLICTRaising critiques of Western-centrism HR defenders are insisting on their own social rightsThis causes: self-regarding among people, social conflict, weaken social solidarity and raise the threat of violence All VS AllDifference of cultures and traditions are the trigger Building a framework in which to considers differences 17THIRD CONFLICTCommunitarian critique against Western philosophical justification HR defenders attempt to purify Buddhism: separation of religion and politics to focus more on the original goal of Enlightenment.In Buddhism notion, individual take responsibility for ones Enlightenment and leads to non-violence (ahimsa)Conception provides a link between agenda of HR and democratic development The satisfactory end does not existIn discussion, consensus is distinguished from mutual understanding and have occur sequentially The road to a consensus is the opposite from the last three conflictsLAST CONFLICT THE ADDING DIFFERENCEMisconception and condemnation drive us away from making consensusDifferences in spiritual or theological basis might be found for a convergence on norms.(International HR standards and certain facts of Sharia) Development of Western philosophical thought and sensibility gives particular force to the condemnation.
20CONCLUSION OF TAYLORNorms, legal forms and background justifications are necessary West people should regain a more adequate view of their history that interwoven in the development and hence be prepared to understand the spiritual paths of different peoples toward the converging goal. Taylor advises HR defenders to refrain from presenting these rights as a radical break from the past so as to prevent fundamentalist backlashes that will only serve to prevent the movement toward agreement.MY CONCLUSION REGARDING TAYLORS ARGUMENTMight be an alternative to seek an consensus rather than disagreeing to each other based on the unsolvable matter (culture, religion, etc.,) His argument, conception of Buddhism provides a link between agenda of HR and democratic development gave me a new point of view.