Topics Justice

Question Hi, Thanks for a fascinating site. One thing that I have often heard is that "You can't have rights without responsibilities", and I wondered if you could explain the reasoning behind that statement. Is it something that can be deduced using philosophy, or is it merely an assertion? Many thanks, Mark

Accepted:
November 3, 2006

Comments

Rights give each of us claims on the conduct of others. Your right not to be tortured requires others to respect this right: not to torture you, not to order or abet your torture, and to organize their society so that you are safe from torture. Denying that others have such responsibilities is tantamount to denying that you have the right.

This reasoning may not quite get us to the statement you query. It shows only that, for you to have rights, others must have responsibilities. But then it would be immorally self-centered for you to insist that you have rights that entail responsibilities for others and that no one else has rights that entail responsibilities for you. The last step is then a moral step. It is possible for someone to have rights but no responsibilities. But such a situation would be morally unacceptable because it would give this person a special moral status that could not be shared by others. For if everyone had no responsibilities, then no one would have rights.