Universalism Vs Relativism

Has moral relativism run its course? The threat of 9/11, terrorism, reproductive technology, and globalization has forced us to ask anew whether there are universal moral truths upon which to base ethical and political judgments. In this timely edited collection, distinguished scholars present and test the best answers to this question. These insightful responses temper the strong antithesis between universalism and relativism and retain sensitivity to how language and history shape the context of our moral decisions. This important and relevant work of contemporary political and social thought is ideal for use in the classroom across many disciplines, including political science, philosophy, ethics, law, and theology.

International Human Rights is a classic socio-legal study of the incompatibility and possible reconciliation of competing views of culture relativism and absolute fundamental human rights. It features prodigious research and insight that is much cited by academics and human rights lawyers and activists over two decades. Quality ebook edition features active Contents, linked notes, and proper presentation of text and charts. Are human rights universal? Universalists and cultural relativists have long been debating this question. In INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS, Alison Dundes Renteln reconciles the two positions and argues that, within the vast array of cultural practices and values, it is possible to create structural equivalents to rights in all societies. She poses that empirical cross-cultural research can reveal universal human rights standards, then demonstrates it through an analysis of the concept of measured retribution. INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS provides an unusual combination of abstract theory and empirical evidence. It will interest scholars and students in political science, sociology, anthropology, peace studies, cross-cultural research, and philosophy, as well as human rights activists.

Part I: Setting universal rights

When he nished writing, he raised his eyes and looked at me. From that day I have thought about Doktor Pannwitz many times and in many ways. I have asked myself how he really functioned as a man; how he lled his time, outside of the Polymerization and the Indo- Germanic conscience; above all when I was once more a free man, I wanted to meet him again, not from a spirit of revenge, but merely from a personal curiosity about the human soul. Because that look was not one between two men; and if I had known how completely to explain the nature of that look, which came as if across the glass window of an aquarium between two beings who live in different worlds, I would also have explained the essence of the great insanity of the third Germany. PRIMO LEVI [If this is a man, pp. 111–112, in, If this is a man and The truce, trans. S. Woolf, Abacus, London, 1987] If all propositions, even the contingent ones, are resolved into identical propositions, are they not all necessary? My answer is: certainly not. For even if it is certain that what is more perfect is what will exist, the less perfect is nevertheless still possible. In propositions of fact, existence is involved. LEIBNIZ [Samtlic ̈ he schriften und briefe vol VI pt 4 Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1449A VI 4] We live in a rule-constrained world.

This is an innovative contribution to the philosophy of human rights. Considering both legal and philosophical scholarship, the views here bear an importance on the legitimacy of international politics and international law. As a result of more than 10 years of research, this revised edition engages with current debates through the help of new sections. Pluralistic universalism considers that, while formal filtering criteria constitute unavoidable requirements for the production of potentially valid arguments, the exemplarity of judgmental activity, in its turn, provides a pluralistic and retrospective reinterpretation for the fixity of such criteria. While speech formal standards grounds the thinnest possible presuppositions we can make as humans, the discursive exemplarity of judgments defends a notion of validity which is both contextually dependent and "subjectively universal". According to this approach, human rights principles are embedded within our linguistic argumentative practice. It is precisely from the intersubjective and dialogical relation among speakers that we come to reflect upon those same conditions of validity of our arguments. Once translated into national and regional constitutional norms, the discursive validity of exemplar judgments postulates the philosophical necessity for an ideal of legal-constitutional pluralism, challenging all those attempts trying to frustrate both horizontal (state to state) and vertical (supra-national-state-social) on-going debates on human rights. On the first edition of this book: “Claudio Corradetti’s book is a thoughtful attempt to find an adequate theoretical foundation for human rights. Its approach is interdisciplinary in nature, drawing on issues in analytical philosophy as well as contemporary political theorists, and the result is a densely argued text aimed at scholars ... .” (Andrew Lambert, Metapsychology Online Reviews, Vol. 14 (3), January, 2010) "Charting a clear course through a vast landscape of theories, Claudio Corradetti develops an original and profound account of human rights beyond objectivism and relativism. A remarkable achievement." (Rainer Forst, Professor of Political Theory and Philosophy, Goethe University Frankfurt/Main)

Is there universalism of human rights? If so, what are its scope and limits? This book is a doctrinal attempt to define universalism of human rights, as well as its scope and limits. The book presents tests of universalism on international, regional and national constitutional levels. It is maintained that universalism of human rights is both a ‘concept’ and a ‘normative reality’. The normative character of human rights is scrutinized through the study of international and regional agreements as well as national constitutions. As a consequence, limitations of normativity are identified, usually on the international level, and take the form of exceptions, reservations, and interpretations. The book is based on the General and National Reports which were originally presented at the 18th International Congress of the International Academy of Comparative Law in Washington D.C. 2010.

Risse takes a refreshingly different approach to understanding the important and topical debates in the subject through the lens of issues of global reach such as justice, human rights, fair trade and immigration, focusing on normative questions that arise about globalization.

Is it possible, given culturally incongruent perspectives, to validate any common standards of behaviour? Is cultural relativity be a problem when cultures are porous? Can we implement human rights without incorporating the idea into the fabric of culture? This book addresses such questions with an inventive and original understanding of culture.