Justification of Rights

First we give a definition of general moral rights. We're talking about moral/normative rights, rights held by everyone, not special rights contingent on agreement or special position.

Rights are individuals' moral claims to freedom of action.

Note that this most general definition lacks specificity, in the sense that it does not say what constitutes freedom of action. (Freedom of action depends on a theory of entitlement, i.e. a system of property rights. But that's another topic.)

Tara Smith in Moral Rights and Politial Freedom attempts to formalize the argument put forth by Ayn Rand and many other libertarian writers. She makes it contingent upon wanting to live in a society where people "have a chance" to run their own lives. Other than this contingency, her premises are based on facts about homo sapiens. Ms. Smith says:

My contention is that respect for individual rights to freedom of action is a necessary condition for individuals' attainment of their highest good. Each person's own life is that person's ultimate value. It can only be attained, though, when a person is free to rule her own life. If we wish to have the chance to achieve that value, then we must recognize rights. ... The argument runs as follows:

1. Human life requires productive effort.
2. Productive effort requires reasoned action.
3. Reasoned action is individual and self-authored.
4. Reasoned action requires freedom.
5. Thus, if we seek to live in a society in which individuals are to have a chance to maintain their lives, we must recognize individual rights to freedom."

What do you think? Does this argument fly?

General Moral Rights

Justification

Descriptive Rights

Ancap FAQ