The inter-relationship of duties and rights within liberal thought

 The inter-relationship of duties and rights within liberal thought.

INTRODUCTION

The inter-relationship of duties and rights within liberal thought , A duty generally prescribes what we need to do and what we ought not do. it's a reason for action. Duty specifies the terms that are binding on individuals and groups in their social practices. it's been suggested that our conscious practices are often seen as motivated by rightbased, duty-based or goal-based perspectives

Rights discourse has been one among the foremost prominent features of up to date political philosophy and political agendas. It argues that persons, mainly as individuals, are the bearers of a body of claims, liberties and powers which the remainder of the society has got to acknowledge and public life should be supported such acknowledgement and support. Such an exaltation of rights has led to a deep unease regarding duties and obligations that are involved the upkeep and reproduction of a just and sane social order or for fostering and promoting a perfect society. The criticisms regarding privileging of rights within the constitution of an honest society has delivered to the fore the role of duties, denoting a shift in perspective, which, while seeing duties as complementary to rights, also construes duties as marking an area of their own.

 

Inter-Relationship Duties and Rights within Liberal Thought

i) Interest Theory

This theory was initially stated by Bentham who saw rights not as natural or moral, but as products of law. He argued that the law by creating duties stipulates rights. He said, “It makes me susceptible to punishment just in case of my doing any of these acts which might have the consequences of disturbing you within the exercise of that right (Hart, 1978).” there's no right if there's no corresponding duty sanctioned by law. This understanding of the relation is usually called as ‘sanction theory’. It makes possession of a right as another’s duty and it becomes a duty as long as it's responsible for punishment. this manner of constructing duties needn't preclude social sanctions of a sort . Individuals as members of non-state organisations could also be subject to rules and to the imposition of sanctions, if they break those rules. Being subject to sanctions means having duties and people who enjoy those duties are often said to possess rights.

ii) Choice Theory

The choice or will theory counter poses itself against the interest theory stipulating the relation between rights and duties. The inter-relationship of duties and rights within liberal , one among the important proponents of this theory is H.L.A. Hart. He suggested that a right may be a sort of choice. The essential feature of a right is that the person to whom the duty is owed is in a position to regulate the performance of that duty.

iii) Autonomy

Autonomy is that the capacity for reflection and to formulate and revise our preferences, desires, values and concepts . The philosopher Kant advanced a theoretical formulation of this notion and suggests a selected conception of duty in reference to this capacity. He suggested that the behaviour of the non-human world is governed naturally . Non-human beings didn't will to act, but acted subject to natural forces and instinct. To the extent citizenry acted on the idea of their appetites and emotions, they too acted heteronomously, The inter-relationship of duties and rights within liberal , i.e. consistent with laws and dictates given externally and not by themselves. The characteristic mark of citizenry is their reason, which enabled them to deliberate the way they ought to act and can to act accordingly. The inter-relationship of duties and rights within liberal , In following this reason, they acted autonomously; they acted in accordance with their duty. The morality prescribed by reason was a matter of ‘practical necessity’. Moral agents understood this necessity and acted accordingly. Through his capacity for autonomy, a private acted consistent with a law that he had prescribed for himself instead of on external dictates.

iv) Justice

John Rawls proposes a group of principles to tell a just society which, he argues, all reasonable people will concur. These principles establish a good and equal basis for collective life expressed in terms of rights. These principles of justice cause two kinds of principles: Principles for institutions which apply to the essential structure of society, and principles for people which set the duties and obligations of persons with reference to institutions and each other the inter-relationship of duties and rights within liberal.

Citizens are duty-bound to support just institutions as they themselves concur to them. For Rawls, persons are sure to abide by social practices upholding a just society on the idea of natural duty or obligation. He, therefore, makes the excellence between duty and obligations. Persons could also be bound by natural duty or obligation. Natural duties are those moral claims that apply to persons regardless of their consent like to assist others in distress, to not be cruel etc. Such duties aren't tied to particular institutions or social arrangements, but are owed to persons as persons.

The liberal tradition on the relation between rights and duties remains profoundly complex. an excellent a part of this complexity has got to do with the type of values prioritised under different tradition of liberalism. Those perspectives which give priority to rights tend to form duties supportive to rights. Those traditions which enforce certain perfectionist values that a society should promote tend to be more emphatic on duties.

• Tweet
• Share
• Share
• Share