Grounding Human Rights In A Pluralist World

In 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which declared that every human being, without “distinction of any kind,” possesses a set of morally authoritative rights and fundamental freedoms that ought to be socially guaranteed. Since that time, human rights have arguably become the cross-cultural moral concept and evaluative tool to measure the performance—and even legitimacy—of domestic regimes. Yet questions remain that challenge their universal validity and theoretical bases. Some theorists are ”maximalist” in their insistence that human rights must be grounded religiously, while an opposing camp attempts to justify these rights in “minimalist” fashion without any necessary recourse to religion, metaphysics, or essentialism. In Grounding Human Rights in a Pluralist World, Grace Kao critically examines the strengths and weaknesses of these contending interpretations while also exploring the political liberalism of John Rawls and the Capability Approach as proposed by economist Amartya Sen and philosopher Martha Nussbaum. By retrieving insights from a variety of approaches, Kao defends an account of human rights that straddles the minimalist–maximalist divide, one that links human rights to a conception of our common humanity and to the notion that ethical realism gives the most satisfying account of our commitment to the equal moral worth of all human beings.

Based on two international conferences on human rights (sponsored, in part, by UNESCO): the first was held in Maastricht, the Netherlands, Sept. 1987; the second in Middleburg, the Netherlands, June 1988. The major objective of the conferences was to undertake a systematic analysis of the title topic in order to increase understanding of the issues in different cultural, religious, and socioeconomic contexts. The 21 contributions are not indexed, nor is a coherent bibliography provided. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR

The argument that religion provides the only compelling foundation for human rights is both challenging and thought-provoking and answering it is of fundamental importance to the furthering of the human rights agenda. This book establishes an equally compelling non-religious foundation for the idea of human rights, engaging with the writings of many key thinkers in the field, including Michael J. Perry, Alan Gewirth, Ronald Dworkin and Richard Rorty. Ari Kohen draws on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a political consensus of overlapping ideas from cultures and communities around the world that establishes the dignity of humans and argues that this dignity gives rise to collective human rights. In constructing this consensus, we have succeeded in establishing a practical non-religious foundation upon which the idea of human rights can rest. In Defense of Human Rights will be of interest to students and scholars of political theory, philosophy, religious studies and human rights.

Selected as an Outstanding Academic Title by Choice Magazine in 2014! This book aims to deepen the student’s understanding of the complex ethical challenges that businesses face in an increasingly globalized world. As the world moves towards greater interdependence, it has been demonstrated that globalization is linked to economic growth. This raises a critical question: as a key player in fostering economic growth, how does the multinational corporation function as a moral agent? Global Capitalism, Culture, and Ethics offers a sophisticated analysis of theoretical ethical issues such as universalism versus pluralism; the connection between law and morality; the validity of a corporate social agenda; and the general parameters of moral responsibilities for multinational corporations. With these foundational issues addressed, the book proceeds to analyze a number of specific controversies such as the proper scope of political activism, disinvestment, environmental sustainability, and responsible sourcing from low wage countries. The analysis of globalization is not confined to a treatment of the moral obligations of multinational corporations, but also reviews the history of global capitalism, the interdependence between governments and multinational corporations, and the beneficial and harmful effects of globalization on social welfare. Weaving together themes from economics, history, philosophy, and law, this book allows the reader to appreciate globalization from multiple perspectives. Its theoretical cogency and uncompromising clarity make it a rewarding read for students interested in issues of ethics and globalization.

The second edition of Historical Dictionary of Human Rights explores both the theory and the practice of international human rights with a focus on the norms and institutions that make up the “architecture” of the global human rights regime and the tools, processes and procedures through which such norms are realized and “enforced.” Particular attention is given to the contextual political and sociological factors that shape and constrain the operation and functioning of international human rights institutions and their state and non-state actors. This is done through a chronology, an introduction, and an extensive bibliography. The dictionary section has more than 1.000 cross-referenced entries on terminology, conventions, treaties, intergovernmental organizations in the United Nations, and non-governmental organizations, as well as some of the pioneers and defenders. This book is an excellent resource for students, researchers, and anyone wanting to know more about human rights.

What is a human? Are humans those with human DNA, those in possession of traits like rationality, or those made in the image of God? The debate over what makes human beings unique has raged for centuries. Many think that if society accepts the wrong definition of what it is to be human, people will look at their neighbor as more of an animal, object, or machine-making maltreatment more likely. In the longest running claim, for over 150 years critics have claimed that taking a Darwinist definition results in people treating each other more like animals. Despite their seriousness, these claims have never been empirically investigated. In this groundbreaking book John H. Evans shows that the definitions promoted by biologists and philosophers actually are associated with less support for human rights. Members of the public who agree with these definitions are less willing to sacrifice to stop genocides and are more supportive of buying organs from poor people, of experimenting on prisoners against their will, and of torturing people to potentially save lives. It appears that the critics are right. However, Evans finds that few Americans agree with these academic definitions. Looking at how most of the public defines humanity, we see a much more nuanced picture. In a fascinating account, he shows that the dominant definitions are unlikely to lead to human rights abuses. He concludes that the critics are right about the definitions of a human promoted by academic biologists and philosophers, and are therefore justified in their vigilance. However, because at present few Americans agree with these definitions, the academic definitions would have to spread much more extensively before impacting how the general public acts. Evans' book is a major corrective to the more than century-long debate about the impact of definitions of a human.

The human rights regime is one of modernity's great civilizing triumphs. From the formal promulgation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 to the subsequent embrace of this declaration by the newly independent states of Africa, human rights have emerged as the primary discourse of global politics and as an increasingly prominent category in the international and domestic legal system. But throughout their history, human rights have endured sustained attempts at disenfranchisement. In this provocative study, Linda Hogan defends human rights language while simultaneously reenvisioning its future. Avoiding problematic claims about shared universal values, Hogan draws on the constructivist strand of political philosophy to argue for a three-pronged conception of human rights: as requirements for human flourishing, as necessary standards of human community, and as the basis for emancipatory politics. In the process, she shows that it is theoretically possible and politically necessary for theologians to keep faith with human rights. Indeed, the Christian tradition—the wellspring of many of the ethical commitments considered central to human rights—must embrace its vital role in the project.

"Latinx Catholics have used Our Lady of Guadalupe as a symbol in democratic campaigns ranging from the United Farm Workers movement to the Chicano movement to the movement for just immigration reform. In diverse ways, these groups use Guadalupe's symbol and narrative to make claims about justice in society's basic structures (law, policy, institutions, for example) while seeking to generate greater participation and representation in US democracy. Yet, Guadalupe is illegible within a liberal political framework that seeks to protect society's basic structures from religious encroachment by relegating religious speech, practices, and symbols to the realm of the background culture. In response to this problem, religious ethicists have argued for expansions of the liberal framework that would make religious language, arguments, and practices communities legible within a pluralistic society without capitulating to anti-democratic modes of governance that undermine pluralism. What remains unexplored is the way that the aesthetic dimensions of particular religious traditions can be engaged toward cultivating a more participatory democracy that invites substantive contributions to society's common life from religious people and communities. Instead, in conversation with political liberalism, Latinx theological aesthetics, and Catholic social thought, The Aesthetics of Solidarity examines the use of particular religious symbols to make democratic claims and generate greater participation and presence in the life of US democracy. After evaluating liberalism's capacity for constructive engagement with religion toward strengthening democratic participation, the project employs Latinx theological aesthetics and Catholic social thought to offer a constructive framework for interpreting religious symbols in the context of a religiously pluralistic and participatory democratic life"--