Rights and Demands: A Response to Kamm

Law and Philosophy:1-12 (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I respond to some questions raised by Frances Kamm with respect to my book Rights and Demands (2018). The book focuses on demand-rights and asks how we accrue them. In other words, how does one accrue the standing to demand an action of someone or rebuke them for non-performance? My response to Kamm emphasizes how I understand “directed duties” in this context. Contrary to the standard practice of rights theorists, I do not start from the assumption that directed duties are constituted by “plain” duties in the context of other factors (about which rights theorists disagree). Rather, I understand my duty to you as the correlative and equivalent of your standing to demand the action in question. I offer a number of further clarifications and conclude by distinguishing the targets of my discussion from other phenomena of interest to moral philosophers, such as complaining and blaming.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,665

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2025-01-06

Downloads
15 (#1,221,168)

6 months
15 (#193,930)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Margaret Gilbert
University of California, Irvine

Citations of this work

Two Concepts of Directed Obligation.Brendan de Kenessey - 2024 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research (3):1-26.
Patriarchy as Institutional.Johan Brännmark - 2021 - Journal of Social Ontology 7 (2):233-254.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references