Wednesday, January 21, 2009

Wellman Chapter 1

It seems to be Wellman's main purpose in Chapter 1 is to emphasize the "empty rhetoric" perspective and why rights may have transitioned into this category. If a right is to be "something that can be justly claimed," then animals do not have rights as Wellman insinuated as an alleged moral right (2). Therefore, it seems excessive at the most to create legislation and regulations that give non-humans rights if society does not even believe they deserve them. 

Who, then, determines who should get rights? "Alleged rights" as Wellman discusses, makes our government institutions seem illegitimate and not practical at accomplishing anything to guarantee citizens justice and peace. I agree wholly with Wellman's argument that many human rights are individualistic and therefore may not even be applicable or for the better of the whole. Or it just gives people, in the form of manipulation, an easy way to avoid social responsibility. 

Many groups turn to the manipulation method, as in social protests, to gain a "right" that they may not have a just claim for. Maybe these social protesters could have gained their movement's aims by using a different mode, rather than distorting language to make it imminent that they gain a certain right. This could, as Wellman suggested, progress society into a more litigious society where citizens only follow legal reasoning.

3 comments:

  1. Does Wellman say that animals don't have rights or that rights are too individualistic? I think he says that some people say this, but I don't see him agreeing with these people (or disagreeing). He seems more to be setting up the alleged problems, not, at this point, arguing whether they are or are not problems.

    Did you read him as saying something different?

    ReplyDelete
  2. No page 11 says, "I attempt to remain neutral for the most part...but to stimulate the reader to arrive at their own evaluation." He's only pointing out that the problems this chapter and book may or may not have been thought about by the reader in this kind of light before. Like the question of women’s rights…that it may not just be about women’s rights it may go beyond that; to the “questions about justification for creating any new legal right.” They say they want legal rights but, some doubt they can ever achieve it. So what is the reason for it?

    ReplyDelete
  3. It seems that I have misunderstood this as well. I believed that those were the opinions of Wellman, but I did get a sense that something was "off". Hm.. we'll see what happens tomorrow :)

    ReplyDelete