Abstract
This essay maintains that the question in its title is really three sets of questions: a conceptual inquiry, a moral/political inquiry, and an empirical inquiry. After devoting some attention to the relevant conceptual issues, the essay ponders in detail the moral/political issues. It suggests some answers to the germane moral/political questions, and it takes pains to distinguish those questions from other lines of inquiry with which they might be confused. Although only animals and dead people are mentioned in the title, the essay also considers whether infants, comatose people, lunatics, future generations, groups, trees, and natural phenomena such as rivers should be classified as potential holders of legal rights.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Reference3 articles.
1. Kramer Matthew H. , “Rights Without Trimmings” in Matthew Kramer H. , Simmonds N.E. , & Steiner Hillel , A Debate Over Rights (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998) 7 at 60–10
2. Wells Martin , Civilization and the Limpet (Reading, MA: Perseus Books, 1998) at 114–19
3. This is the factor to which Joseph Raz adverts when he opens his definition of “x has a right” with the clause “if and only if x can have rights.” Raz Joseph , The Morality of Freedom (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986) at 166
Cited by
25 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献