introduction for human rights essay

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Here’s your new year gift, one app for all your, study abroad needs, start your journey, track your progress, grow with the community and so much more.

Verification Code

An OTP has been sent to your registered mobile no. Please verify

Thanks for your comment !

Our team will review it before it's shown to our readers.

Essay on Human Rights: Samples in 500 and 1500

Updated on
Dec 9, 2023

Essay writing is an integral part of the school curriculum and various academic and competitive exams like IELTS , TOEFL , SAT , UPSC , etc. It is designed to test your command of the English language and how well you can gather your thoughts and present them in a structure with a flow. To master your ability to write an essay, you must read as much as possible and practise on any given topic. This blog brings you a detailed guide on how to write an essay on Human Rights , with useful essay samples on Human rights.

This Blog Includes:

The basic human rights, 200 words essay on human rights, 500 words essay on human rights, 500+ words essay on human rights in india, 1500 words essay on human rights, importance of human rights, essay on human rights pdf.

What are Human Rights

Human rights mark everyone as free and equal, irrespective of age, gender, caste, creed, religion and nationality. The United Nations adopted human rights in light of the atrocities people faced during the Second World War. On the 10th of December 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Its adoption led to the recognition of human rights as the foundation for freedom, justice and peace for every individual. Although it’s not legally binding, most nations have incorporated these human rights into their constitutions and domestic legal frameworks. Human rights safeguard us from discrimination and guarantee that our most basic needs are protected.

Did you know that the 10th of December is celebrated as Human Rights Day ?

Before we move on to the essays on human rights, let’s check out the basics of what they are.

8 Universities with higher ROI than IITs and IIMs

Grab this one-time opportunity to download this ebook

Connect With Us

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. take the first step today..

Resend OTP in

Need help with?

Study abroad.

UK, Canada, US & More

IELTS, GRE, GMAT & More

Scholarship, Loans & Forex

Country Preference

New Zealand

Which English test are you planning to take?

Which academic test are you planning to take.

Not Sure yet

When are you planning to take the exam?

Already booked my exam slot

Within 2 Months

Want to learn about the test

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

When do you want to start studying abroad.

September 2024

January 2025

What is your budget to study abroad?

How would you describe this article ?

Please rate this article

We would like to hear more.

The complex origins, development, and meanings of human rights

By Eric D. Weitz June 14, 2022

In 2015, a young girl and her father crossed into the United States from the border with Mexico. Astrid and Arturo, K’iche’ Indians from Guatemala, were fleeing the systematic discrimination and violence their people have suffered for decades. US officials detained Astrid and Arturo for only one day. They had applied for political asylum and were allowed to move on. They began to build a life in Pennsylvania as they awaited the decision on their asylum status. Three years later, in 2018, US immigration authorities raided their home in the middle of the night and arrested them. Human rights lawyers argued that Astrid and Arturo were unjustly detained. Amnesty International launched a campaign to free them. The authorities were deluged with nearly two thousand phone calls and tens of thousands of petitions demanding their release. The calls and petitions arrived from nearly every continent on the globe. Officials relented, and after a month set father and daughter free. For now. Their status as asylum seekers has, as of autumn 2018, still not been finally decided. 1

One story from one family among the more than 68.5 million migrants, asylum seekers, and refugees in the world today. 2 Yet the experiences of Astrid and Arturo speak to the three questions that animate this book: Who has access to rights? What do we mean by human rights? And how do we obtain rights?

Human rights are never as simple as we might think from reading, say, the preamble and thirty articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). That is precisely the point of A World Divided . I aim not just to celebrate human rights (although I do most definitely support them), but to explore their complex origins, development, and meanings since the eighteenth century. I do so by examining the histories of various nation-states and one federation of nationalities (the Soviet Union) and the human rights they proclaimed. I have chosen these particular cases, culled from around the globe over the past two and one-half centuries, because they encompass the variety of modern political and economic systems, from republic to empire, slavery to socialism, colonialism to communism.

Human rights offer people around the world the prospects of expansive, liberty-endowed, self-determining lives, despite the violations, deprivations, and atrocities we still witness on virtually every continent. Even where they exist only as promises and hopes, human rights stand as a triumph of the human spirit and intellect. Where implemented, they protect us from the arbitrary power of the state. They assure us that policemen cannot enter our homes unless granted a warrant, and no government agency can arbitrarily seize the property we own. Every time individuals around the globe go to a polling place to pull a lever or scratch an X to choose the representatives of their choice, wherever people raise their voices in meetings and rallies or in letters to their local newspaper, they are exercising rights of free speech that make them participants of the worlds they inhabit, whether it be their local village or town or country. Whenever people demand clean water or adequate healthcare, they are expressing their social rights. Through all these activities, they are no longer mere objects who are ordered about or moved around at someone’s whim, nor subjects who, if fate treats them well, receive benefits from those above them. Rights give people power in the best sense of the term—the ability to shape their own lives and the societies in which they live. Rights enhance our capacity to be more fully human.

In our divided world of 193 sovereign nation-states, we have rights first and foremost as national citizens. But who, in fact, constitutes the nation and by what criteria? Were Arturo and Astrid, as Indians, national citizens and therefore able to exercise rights in Guatemala? Who has the “right to have rights”?—as Hannah Arendt, and the German Enlightenment philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte before her, asked. 3 Access to rights in the nation-state is the first major theme of this book. From Greek rebels in the early nineteenth century to anticolonial Africans in the twentieth, all had to face the questions: Who belongs to the nation? Who qualifies to be a rights-bearing citizen, and what kinds of rights may he or she possess? What happens to those who live within the territory of the new nation-state but are somehow different from the dominant group, whether by virtue of skin color, religion, language, or any other trait? This quandary remains with us today, as Arturo and Astrid know all too well.

A World Divided affirms the powerful and creative history of human rights from the late eighteenth century to the present. It also presents a critique of the limitations of rights, so long as they are based in the nation-state and national or racial citizenship. 4 In fact, the book takes the problem one step further: the great paradox of the history presented here is that nation-states create rights for some at the same time that they exclude others, at times quite brutally. The state is our protector; it is also our greatest threat. 5 This dilemma, that the state, at its best, enforces human rights, but at the same time limits the circle of those who can possess rights, is our history as well as our present and future. As far as anyone can imagine, we will continue to inhabit a world of 193 sovereign independent states (give or take one, two, or three).

Only since 1945 has the emergence of international human rights offered a model of universal rights beyond the nation-state. The UDHR, passed by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly on 10 December 1948, proclaims that rights inhere in everyone regardless of national citizenship. Scores of international treaties confirm the point that even the stateless possess human rights and therefore need to be protected by states and the international community. 6 Asylum seekers, like Arturo and Astrid, are especially protected, and they at least were released from detention after one month. Every step that moves the protection of human rights to the international level, however partial and limited, constitutes, I argue, a major advance, the best-laid path out of the quandaries and limitations of human rights based exclusively in national citizenship. 7

Nonetheless, in the vast majority of cases we are still dependent on the nation-state to establish and enforce human rights, or are compelled to fight the nation-state as the supreme violator of rights. Activists around the globe appeal to international human rights standards. But their first station stop is their own state, which they call upon to ensure free speech, provide clean water, and rein in paramilitaries who wreak havoc on populations. 8

One truth about human rights is incontrovertible (and it may be the only truth): they are dynamic. Their meaning has evolved over the past two and one-half centuries, and that is the second theme pursued in this book. Once reserved for some people—propertied men, white Europeans, loyal Soviets—they were quickly demanded by those who had been excluded. Activists turned the rhetoric and law of rights against those who reigned, and demanded a free and open, more inclusive society. We shall see this phenomenon at work time and again, in Brazil, the Soviet Union, South Korea, and Rwanda and Burundi, and in other histories explored in each of the chapters. We shall also see it at work internationally, notably in the movement for women’s rights after 1945.

As the charmed circle of rights-bearing citizens expanded, so did the meaning of those rights. In the nineteenth century, new states were primarily liberal in character. They proclaimed political rights, like the right to free speech and assembly and protection from unwarranted search and seizure, but provided little to nothing in the way of social rights. 9 Yet already by the mid-nineteenth century, socialists, feminists, and some liberals raised the objection that rights conceived solely in political terms ignored the great needs and desires of the vast majority of the population. 10

Today, most scholars and activists insist that the political rights derived from the great revolutions of the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries must be complemented by social and economic rights. The UN said as much in 1966 by passing the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (the United States, though a signatory, has never ratified the treaty). The Guatemalan Constitution, like so many others around the globe, conforms to this understanding. 11 Its section on “Human Rights,” primarily political in orientation, is immediately followed by one on “Social Rights.” Had the state come anywhere close to following its own prescriptions, Arturo and Astrid would have been able to speak out freely and express their cultural identity, and would have had access to healthcare and education—the full complement of human rights as understood today.

This essay is an excerpt from A World Divided: The Global Struggle for Human Rights in the Age of Nation-States by Eric D. Weitz .

About the Author

Eric D. Weitz (1953–2021) was Distinguished Professor of History at City College and the Graduate Center, City University of New York. He was also the author of Weimar Germany: Promise and Tragedy , which was named a New York Times Book Review Editor’s Choice; A Century of Genocide: Utopias of Race and Nation; and Creating German Communism, 1890–1990: From Popular Protests to Socialist State (all Princeton).

1. I take this story from the Amnesty International website: “I Welcome: Protecting the Rights of Refugees and Asylum-Seekers,” n.d., accessed 13 August 2018, https://www.amnestyusa.org/campaigns/refugee-and-migrant-rights/, and “Help Release 15-Year-Old Astrid and Her Father,” n.d., accessed 13 August 2018, https://act.amnestyusa.org/page/21189/action/1.

2. Figure from the United Nations High Commission for Refugees, “Figures at a Glance,” n.d., accessed 13 August 2018, http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/figures-at-a-glance.html.

3. Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (1951; Cleveland: Meridian, 1958), 296. Arendt’s formulation, “the right to have rights,” is uncannily close to Fichte’s: “The one true right that belongs to the human being as such [is]: the right to be able to acquire rights.” See Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Foundations of Natural Right, according to the Principles of the Wissenschaftslehre , ed. Frederick Neuhouser, trans. Michael Baur (1796; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 333. Arendt makes no reference to Fichte’s formulation, nor do any of the major Arendt scholars.

The German original: “Dies allein is das eigentliche Menschenrecht, das den [dem, editor] Menschen, als Menschen, zukommt; die Möglichkeit sich Rechte zu erwerben.” Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Grundlage des Naturrechts nach Principien der Wissenschaftslehre (1796), in J. G. Fichte: Gesamtausgabe der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften , ed. Reinhard Lauth and Hans Gliwitzky, pt. 1, vol. 4, Werke 1797–1798 (Stuttgart: Friedrich Frommann Verlag, 1970), 163.

4. I do not, however, share the withering criticisms of some recent authors, who tell us that human rights are on the wane; have altogether failed; are utopian in character and therefore undermine the real and necessary world of politics, which has to be about limited goals; divert attention from more critical social issues, like inequality; or are Western-based and therefore necessarily imperialist in character. See, for example, Samuel Moyn, Not Enough: Human Rights in an Unequal World (Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2018), and The Last Utopia: Human Rights in History (Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2010); Eric A. Posner, The Twilight of Human Rights Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014); and Stephen Hopgood, The Endtimes of Human Rights (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2013). For a very effective challenge to such critiques, see Kathryn Sikkink, Evidence for Hope: Making Human Rights Work in the 21st Century (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2017), and Beth A. Simmons, Mobilizing for Human Rights: International Law in Domestic Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009). See also the pioneering work of Lynn Hunt, Inventing Human Rights: A History (New York: Norton, 2007). On the French debates, see Justine Lacroix and Jean-Yves Pranchère, Le procès des droits de l’homme: Généalogie du scepticisme démocratique (Paris: Seuil, 2016), which is highly critical of the francophone opponents of human rights. Lacroix and Pranchère’s position is very similar to my own.

5. See Christian Reus-Smit, Individual Rights and the Making of the International System (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 210–11, who writes similarly. For two significant works on related themes, though neither addresses directly human rights, see Philipp Ther, The Dark Side of Nation-States: Ethnic Cleansing in Modern Europe , trans. Charlotte Kreutzmüller (2011; New York: Berghahn, 2014), and Michael Mann, The Dark Side of Democracy: Explaining Ethnic Cleansing (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005).

6. See David Weissbrodt, The Human Rights of Non-Citizens (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008).

7. Amid a huge literature on citizenship and rights, I have found especially compelling Ayten Gündoğdu, Rightlessness in an Age of Rights (New York: Oxford University Press, 2015); Margaret R. Somers, Genealogies of Citizenship: Markets, Statelessness, and the Right to Have Rights (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008); and Seyla Benhabib, The Rights of Others: Aliens, Residents, and Citizens (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004). All three authors work in conversation with Hannah Arendt. On the long and complex history of citizenship, see Frederick Cooper, Citizenship, Inequality, and Difference: Historical Perspectives (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2018). Cooper emphasizes the diverse meanings of citizenship, in the present as well as historically. For one of the classic statements, see T. H. Marshall, “Citizenship and Social Class” (1950), in Class, Citizenship, and Social Development: Essays by T. H. Marshall , introduction by Seymour Martin Lipset (Garden City: Doubleday, 1964), 65–122.

8. See Steve J. Stern and Scott Straus, “Introduction: Embracing Paradox: Human Rights in the Global Age,” in The Human Rights Paradox: Universality and its Discontents , ed. Stern and Straus (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2014), 3–28. Also on the complexity of human rights, see Stefan-Ludwig Hoffmann, “Introduction: Genealogies of Human Rights,” in Human Rights in the Twentieth Century , ed. Hoffmann (2010; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011), 1–26.

9. Isaiah Berlin’s famed distinction between negative and positive liberty applies here. See “Two Concepts of Liberty” (1958), in Four Essays on Liberty (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1969), 118–72.

10. On the varieties of liberal thought, see Helena Rosenblatt, The Lost History of Liberalism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2018). For arguments about the socialist contribution to a broadened conception of human rights, see Lacroix and Pranchère, Procès des droits de l’homme , and Gregory Claeys, “Socialism and the Language of Human Rights: The Origins and Implications of Economic Rights,” in Revisiting the Origins of Human Rights , ed. Pamela Slotte and Miia Halme-Tuomisaari (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), 206–36. See also Hunt, Inventing Human Rights .

11. For the text of the constitution, see “Guatemala’s Constitution of 1985 with Amendments through 1993,” Constitute Project, 17 January 2018, https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Guatemala_1993.pdf.

Stay connected for new books and special offers. Subscribe to receive a welcome discount for your next order.

ebook & Audiobook Cart

Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
SPH Scholarly Articles
Communities & Collections
By Issue Date
FAS Department
Quick submit
Waiver Generator
DASH Stories
Accessibility
COVID-related Research
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
By Collections
By Departments

Show simple item record

Human Rights: A Brief Introduction

Files in this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

SPH Scholarly Articles [6362]

Inspiring human rights essays everybody should know

Can Human Rights Bring Social Justice? 12 Essays

Technically this is a collection of 12 separate essays, but all of them address the same topic: the intersection of human rights and social justice.

Scholars from countries around the world discuss what human rights and social justice actually mean, the potential for human rights to lead to social justice (or not), and what the role of human rights organizations like Amnesty International is in the conversation and practice of human rights law and social justice. Each author offers a unique perspective, some positive and some critical, on the topic and covers a specific aspect of the topic to help create a whole picture.

Women’s Rights are Human Rights

In this publication from the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), the contributors explore one of the most fundamental and essential human rights: the rights of women. From the perspective of the United Nations, this publication is a comprehensive overview of the issue of human rights, including the international human rights laws and UN practices related to the topic. Additionally, it talks about specific issues relating to women’s rights, such as reproductive health, standard of living, conflict, violence against women, access to justice, and more. Through each of these specific areas, this report gives examples of the human rights framework in action through real-life cases.

Part 1: So Software Has Eaten the World: What Does It Mean for Human Rights, Security and Governance ; Part 2: Digital Disruption of Human Rights

This two-part article from Eileen Donahoe, Director of Global Affairs for Human Rights Watch, discusses the intersection of technology and human rights in an increasingly digital age. Donahoe’s experiences serving with UNHCR, Human Rights Watch, International Service for Human Rights, and Stanford University’s Center for International Security and Cooperation provide a unique and informed perspective on the challenges that technology brings the progression and implementation of human rights. The first article addresses issues related to governance and globalization, and the second article talks about the disparity in human rights that technology can cause and has caused already. For human rights professionals, her articles provide important insight to consider in the implementation and practice of human rights law.

The Perils of Indifference

Although this essay was originally a speech from Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel, it is important reminder of where the world has been in terms of human rights violations, as well as where we should strive to be. While the tenants of the speech are ones that most human rights professionals know, they are also tenants that can be easy to forget in the day-to-day work and the seemingly endless fight for justice. Wiesel reminds human rights professionals, along with the rest of the world, why they shouldn’t give in to indifference when the struggle for human rights is long and difficult. Beyond being an inspiring piece, this speech, and Wiesel’s writings in general, have been key pieces to human rights theory and practice, shaping the ideas and ideals we have today.

Letter from Birmingham Jail

Another important historical piece in the human and civil rights movements is Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail.” In addition to defending the practice of nonviolent protest, the letter also serves as a call to action for people to take direct action against unjust laws rather than to rely or wait on the courts to serve justice. King’s letter is a reminder for all human rights professionals that the road to human rights practice is not easy and is not always black and white. As an essay addressing one of the most fundamental and long-standing human rights issues, racial inequality, this letter is an inspiring and historical reminder for all human rights professionals.

Apply Now for the United Nations The Hague Immersion Programme

The UN Immersion Programme Is Open for Applications!

The UN Young Leaders Online Training Programme is Open for Applications!

Apply now: Essex Human Rights Summer School (Fully Online)

17 International Organizations Offering Early-Career Opportunities

Gender Rights Jobs: Our Short Guide

Free MOOC on Children’s Right to Education in Armed Conflict

9 Online Courses on Leading Diverse Teams

40 Top-Rated Social Issues Courses to Study in 2024

10 Courses to Prepare for Your Human Rights Job

Register now: Global Institute of Human Rights Certificate Program

NGO Jobs: Our Short Guide

About the author, allison reefer.

Allison Reefer is a young professional living in Pittsburgh, PA. She works with a refugee resettlement agency to help refugees and immigrants in the city, and she volunteers with a local shelter for human trafficking victims. She obtained her Master in International Development from the University of Pittsburgh and a BA in Writing from Geneva College, focusing most of her academic work on human trafficking and migration in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. In her free time, she loves to write, read, sing and play bass guitar, practice Russian, and explore her city.

Table of Contents
Random Entry
Chronological
Editorial Information
About the SEP
Editorial Board
How to Cite the SEP
Special Characters
Advanced Tools
Support the SEP
PDFs for SEP Friends
Make a Donation
SEPIA for Libraries
Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

Friends PDF Preview
Author and Citation Info
Back to Top

Human Rights

Human rights are norms that aspire to protect all people everywhere from severe political, legal, and social abuses. Examples of human rights are the right to freedom of religion, the right to a fair trial when charged with a crime, the right not to be tortured, and the right to education.

The philosophy of human rights addresses questions about the existence, content, nature, universality, justification, and legal status of human rights. The strong claims often made on behalf of human rights (for example, that they are universal, inalienable, or exist independently of legal enactment as justified moral norms) have frequently provoked skeptical doubts and countering philosophical defenses (on these critiques see Lacrois and Pranchere 2016, Mutua 2008, and Waldron 1988). Reflection on these doubts and the responses that can be made to them has become a sub-field of political and legal philosophy with a very substantial literature (see the Bibliography below).

This entry addresses the concept of human rights, the existence and grounds of human rights, the question of which rights are human rights, and relativism about human rights.

1. The General Idea of Human Rights

2.1 how can human rights exist, 2.2 normative justifications for human rights, 2.3 political conceptions of human rights, 3.1 civil and political rights, 3.2 social rights, 3.3 rights of women, minorities, and groups, 3.4 environmental rights, 4. universal human rights in a world of diverse beliefs and practices, bibliography: books and articles in the philosophy of human rights, recent collections, guides to international human rights law, other resources, related entries.

This section attempts to explain the general idea of human rights by identifying four defining features. The goal is to answer the question of what human rights are with a description of the core concept rather than a list of specific rights. Two people can have the same general idea of human rights even though they disagree about which rights belong on a list of such rights and even about whether universal moral rights exist. The four-part explanation below attempts to cover all kinds of human rights including both moral and legal human rights and both old and new human rights (e.g., both Lockean natural rights and contemporary human rights). The explanation anticipates, however, that particular kinds of human rights will have additional features. Starting with this general concept does not commit us to treating all kinds of human rights in a single unified theory (see Buchanan 2013 for an argument that we should not attempt to theorize together universal moral rights and international legal human rights).

(1) Human rights are rights . Lest we miss the obvious, human rights are rights (see Cruft 2012 and the entry on rights ). Most if not all human rights are claim rights that impose duties or responsibilities on their addressees or dutybearers. Rights focus on a freedom, protection, status, or benefit for the rightholders (Beitz 2009). The duties associated with human rights often require actions involving respect, protection, facilitation, and provision. Rights are usually mandatory in the sense of imposing duties on their addressees, but some legal human rights seem to do little more than declare high-priority goals and assign responsibility for their progressive realization. One can argue, of course, that goal-like rights are not real rights, but it may be better to recognize that they comprise a weak but useful notion of a right (See Beitz 2009 for a defense of the view that not all human rights are rights in a strong sense. And see Feinberg 1973 for the idea of “manifesto rights”). A human rights norm might exist as (a) a shared norm of actual human moralities, (b) a justified moral norm supported by strong reasons, (c) a legal right at the national level (where it might be referred to as a “civil” or “constitutional” right), or (d) a legal right within international law. A human rights advocate might wish to see human rights exist in all four ways (See Section 2.1 How Can Human Rights Exist?).

(2) Human rights are plural . If someone accepted that there are human rights but held that there is only one of them, this might make sense if she meant that there is one abstract underlying right that generates a list of specific rights (See Dworkin 2011 for a view of this sort). But if this person meant that there is just one specific right such as the right to peaceful assembly this would be a highly revisionary view. Human rights address a variety of specific problems such as guaranteeing fair trials, ending slavery, ensuring the availability of education, and preventing genocide. Some philosophers advocate very short lists of human rights but nevertheless accept plurality (see Cohen 2004, Ignatieff 2004).

(3) Human rights are universal . All living humans—or perhaps all living persons —have human rights. One does not have to be a particular kind of person or a member of some specific nation or religion to have human rights. Included in the idea of universality is some conception of independent existence . People have human rights independently of whether they are found in the practices, morality, or law of their country or culture. This idea of universality needs several qualifications, however. First, some rights, such as the right to vote, are held only by adult citizens or residents and apply only to voting in one’s own country. Second, the human right to freedom of movement may be taken away temporarily from a person who is convicted of committing a serious crime. And third, some human rights treaties focus on the rights of vulnerable groups such as minorities, women, indigenous peoples, and children.

(4) Human rights have high-priority . Maurice Cranston held that human rights are matters of “paramount importance” and their violation “a grave affront to justice” (Cranston 1967). If human rights did not have high priority they would not have the ability to compete with other powerful considerations such as national stability and security, individual and national self-determination, and national and global prosperity. High priority does not mean, however, that human rights are absolute. As James Griffin says, human rights should be understood as “resistant to trade-offs, but not too resistant” (Griffin 2008). Further, there seems to be priority variation within human rights. For example, when the right to life conflicts with the right to privacy, the latter will generally be outweighed.

Let’s now consider five other features or functions that might be added.

Should human rights be defined as inalienable? Inalienability does not mean that rights are absolute or can never be overridden by other considerations. Rather it means that its holder cannot lose it temporarily or permanently by bad conduct or by voluntarily giving it up. It is doubtful that all human rights are inalienable in this sense. One who endorses both human rights and imprisonment as punishment for serious crimes must hold that people’s rights to freedom of movement can be forfeited temporarily or permanently by just convictions of serious crimes. Perhaps it is sufficient to say that human rights are very hard to lose. (For a stronger view of inalienability, see Donnelly 2003, Meyers 1985).

Should human rights be defined as minimal rights? A number of philosophers have proposed the view that human rights are minimal in the sense of not being too numerous (a few dozen rights rather than hundreds or thousands), and not being too demanding (See Joshua Cohen 2004, Ignatieff 2005, and Rawls 1999). Their views suggest that human rights are—or should be—more concerned with avoiding the worst than with achieving the best. Henry Shue suggests that human rights concern the “lower limits on tolerable human conduct” rather than “great aspirations and exalted ideals” (Shue 1996). When human rights are modest standards they leave most legal and policy matters open to democratic decision-making at the national and local levels. This allows human rights to have high priority, to accommodate a great deal of cultural and institutional variation among countries, and to leave open a large space for democratic decision-making at the national level. Still, there is no contradiction in the idea of an extremely expansive list of human rights and hence minimalism is not a defining feature of human rights (for criticism of the view that human rights are minimal standards see Brems 2009 and Raz 2010). Minimalism is best seen as a normative prescription for what international human rights should be. Moderate forms of minimalism have considerable appeal, but not as part of the definition of human rights.

Should human rights be defined as always being or “mirroring” moral rights? Philosophers coming to human rights theory from moral philosophy sometimes assume that human rights must be, at bottom, moral rather than legal rights. There is no contradiction, however, in people saying that they believe in human rights, but only when they are legal rights at the national or international levels. As Louis Henkin observed, “Political forces have mooted the principal philosophical objections, bridging the chasm between natural and positive law by converting natural human rights into positive legal rights” (Henkin 1978). Theorists who insist that the only human rights are legal rights may find, however, that the interpretations they can give of universality, independent existence, and high priority are weak.

Should human rights be defined in terms of serving some sort of political function? Instead of seeing human rights as grounded in some sort of independently existing moral reality, a theorist might see them as the norms of a highly useful political practice that humans have constructed or evolved. Such a view would see the idea of human rights as playing various political roles at the national and international levels and as serving thereby to protect urgent human and national interests. These political roles might include providing standards for international evaluations of how governments treat their people and specifying when use of economic sanctions or military intervention is permissible (see Section 2.3 Political Conceptions of Human Rights below).

Political theorists would add to the four defining elements suggested above some set of political roles or functions. This kind of view may be plausible for the very salient international human rights that have emerged in international law and politics in the last fifty years. But human rights can exist and function in contexts not involving international scrutiny and intervention such as a world with only one state. Imagine, for example, that an asteroid strike had killed everyone in all countries except New Zealand, leaving it the only state in existence. Surely the idea of human rights as well as many dimensions of human rights practice could continue in New Zealand, even though there would be no international relations, law, or politics (for an argument of this sort see Tasioulas 2012). And if in the same scenario a few people were discovered to have survived in Iceland and were living without a government or state, New Zealanders would know that human rights governed how these people should be treated even though they were stateless. How deeply the idea of human rights must be rooted in international law and practice should not be settled by definitional fiat. We can allow, however, that the sorts of political functions that Rawls and Beitz describe are typically served by international human rights today.

2. The Existence and Grounds of Human Rights

A philosophical question about human rights that occurs to many people is how it is possible for such rights to exist. Several possible ways are explored in this section.

The most obvious way in which human rights come into existence is as norms of national and international law that are created by enactment, custom, and judicial decisions. At the international level, human rights norms exist because of treaties that have turned them into international law. For example, the human right not to be held in slavery or servitude in Article 4 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Council of Europe, 1950) and in Article 8 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (UN 1966) exists because these treaties establish it. At the national level, human rights norms exist because they have through legislative enactment, judicial decision, or custom become part of a country’s law. For example, the right against slavery exists in the United States because the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits slavery and servitude. When rights are embedded in international law we speak of them as human rights; but when they are enacted in national law we more frequently describe them as civil or constitutional rights.

Enactment in national and international law is clearly one of the ways in which human rights exist. But many have suggested that this cannot be the only way. If human rights exist only because of enactment, their availability is contingent on domestic and international political developments. Many people have looked for a way to support the idea that human rights have roots that are deeper and less subject to human decisions than legal enactment. One version of this idea is that people are born with rights, that human rights are somehow innate or inherent in human beings (see Morsink 2009). One way that a normative status could be inherent in humans is by being God-given. The U.S. Declaration of Independence (1776) claims that people are “endowed by their Creator” with natural rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. On this view, God, the supreme lawmaker, enacted some basic human rights.

Rights plausibly attributed to divine decree must be very general and abstract (life, liberty, etc.) so that they can apply to thousands of years of human history, not just to recent centuries. But contemporary human rights are specific and many of them presuppose contemporary institutions (e.g., the right to a fair trial and the right to education). Even if people are born with God-given natural rights, we need to explain how to get from those general and abstract rights to the specific rights found in contemporary declarations and treaties.

Attributing human rights to God’s commands may give them a secure status at the metaphysical level, but in a very diverse world it does not make them practically secure. Billions of people do not believe in the God of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. If people do not believe in God, or in the sort of god that prescribes rights, and if you want to base human rights on theological beliefs you must persuade these people of a rights-supporting theological view. This is likely to be even harder than persuading them of human rights. Legal enactment at the national and international levels provides a far more secure status for practical purposes.

Human rights could also exist independently of legal enactment by being part of actual human moralities. All human groups seem to have moralities in the sense of imperative norms of interpersonal behavior backed by reasons and values. These moralities contain specific norms (for example, a prohibition of the intentional murder of an innocent person) and specific values (for example, valuing human life.) If almost all human groups have moralities containing norms prohibiting murder, these norms could partially constitute the human right to life.

The view that human rights are norms found in all human moralities is attractive but has serious difficulties. Although worldwide acceptance of human rights has been increasing rapidly in recent decades (see 4. Universal Human Rights in a World of Diverse Beliefs and Practices ), worldwide moral unanimity about human rights does not exist. Human rights declarations and treaties are intended to change existing norms, not just describe the existing moral consensus.

Yet another way of explaining the existence of human rights is to say that they exist most basically in true or justified ethical outlooks. On this account, to say that there is a human right against torture is mainly to assert that there are strong reasons for believing that it is always morally wrong to engage in torture and that protections should be provided against it. This approach would view the Universal Declaration as attempting to formulate a justified political morality for the whole planet. It was not merely trying to identify a preexisting moral consensus; it was rather trying to create a consensus that could be supported by very plausible moral and practical reasons. This approach requires commitment to the objectivity of such reasons. It holds that just as there are reliable ways of finding out how the physical world works, or what makes buildings sturdy and durable, there are ways of finding out what individuals may justifiably demand of each other and of governments. Even if unanimity about human rights is currently lacking, rational agreement is available to humans if they will commit themselves to open-minded and serious moral and political inquiry. If moral reasons exist independently of human construction, they can—when combined with true premises about current institutions, problems, and resources—generate moral norms different from those currently accepted or enacted. The Universal Declaration seems to proceed on exactly this assumption (see Morsink 2009). One problem with this view is that existence as good reasons seems a rather thin form of existence for human rights. But perhaps we can view this thinness as a practical rather than a theoretical problem, as something to be remedied by the formulation and enactment of legal norms. The best form of existence for human rights would combine robust legal existence with the sort of moral existence that comes from widespread acceptance based on strong moral and practical reasons.

Justifications for human rights should defend their main features including their character as rights, their universality, and their high priority. Such justifications should also be capable of providing starting points for justifying a plausible list of specific rights (on starting points and making the transition to specific rights see Nickel 2007; see also Section 3 Which Rights are Human Rights? below). Further, justifying international human rights is likely to require additional steps (Buchanan 2012). These requirements make the construction of a good justification for human rights a daunting task.

Approaches to justification include grounding human rights in prudential reasons, practical reasons, moral rights (Thomson 1990), human well-being (Sumner 1987, Talbott 2010), fundamental interests (Beitz 2015), human needs (Miller 2012), agency and autonomy (Gewirth 1996, Griffin 2008) dignity (Gilabert 2018, Kateb 2011, Tasioulas 2015), fairness (Nickel 2007), equality, and positive freedom (Gould 2004, Nussbaum 2000, Sen 2004). Justifications can be based on just one of these types of reasons or they can be eclectic and appeal to several (Tasioulas. 2015).

Grounding human rights in human agency and autonomy has had strong advocates in recent decades. For example, in Human Rights: Essays on Justification and Application (1982) Alan Gewirth offered an agency-based justification for human rights. He argued that denying the value of successful agency and action is not an option for a human being; having a life requires regarding the indispensable conditions of agency and action as necessary goods. Abstractly described, these conditions of successful agency are freedom and well-being. A prudent rational agent who must have freedom and well-being will assert a “prudential right claim” to them. Having demanded that others respect her freedom and well-being, consistency requires her to recognize and respect the freedom and well-being of other persons. Since all other agents are in exactly the same position as she is of needing freedom and well-being, consistency requires her to recognize and respect their claims to freedom and well-being. She “logically must accept” that other people as agents have equal rights to freedom and well-being. These two abstract rights work alone and together to generate equal specific human rights of familiar sorts (Gewirth 1978, 1982, 1996). Gewirth’s aspiration was to provide an argument for human rights that applies to all human agents and that is inescapable. From a few hard-to-dispute facts and a principle of consistency he thinks we can derive two generic human rights—and from them, a list of more determinate rights. Gewirth’s views have generated a large critical literature (see Beyleveld 1991, Boylan 1999).

A more recent attempt to base human rights on agency and autonomy is found in James Griffin’s book, On Human Rights (2008). Griffin does not share Gewirth’s goal of providing a logically inescapable argument for human rights, but his overall view shares key structural features with Gewirth’s. These include starting the justification with the unique value of human agency and autonomy (which Griffin calls “normative agency”), postulating some abstract rights (autonomy, freedom, and well-being), and making a place for a right to well-being within an agency-based approach.

In the current dispute between “moral” (or “orthodox”) and “political” conceptions of human rights, Griffin strongly sides with those who see human rights as fundamentally moral rights. Their defining role, in Griffin’s view, is protecting people’s ability to form and pursue conceptions of a worthwhile life—a capacity that Griffin variously refers to as “autonomy,” “normative agency,” and “personhood.” This ability to form, revise, and pursue conceptions of a worthwhile life is taken to be of paramount value, the exclusive source of human dignity, and thereby the basis of human rights (Griffin 2008). Griffin holds that people value this capacity “especially highly, often more highly than even their happiness.”

“Practicalities” also shape human rights in Griffin’s view. He describes practicalities as “a second ground” of human rights. They prescribe making the boundaries of rights clear by avoiding “too many complicated bends,” enlarging rights a little to give them safety margins, and consulting facts about human nature and the nature of society. Accordingly, the justifying generic function that Griffin assigns to human rights is protecting normative agency while taking account of practicalities.

Griffin claims that human rights suffer even more than other normative concepts from an “indeterminacy of sense” that makes them vulnerable to proliferation (Griffin 2008). He thinks that tying all human rights to the single value of normative agency while taking account of practicalities is the best way to remedy this malady. He criticizes the frequent invention of new human rights and the “ballooning of the content” of established rights. Still, Griffin is friendly towards most of the rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Beyond this, Griffin takes human rights to include many rights in interpersonal morality. For example, Griffin thinks that a child’s human right to education applies not just against governments but also against the child’s parents.

Griffin’s thesis that all human rights are grounded in normative agency is put forward not so much as a description but as a proposal, as the best way of giving human rights unity, coherence, and limits. Unfortunately, accepting and following this proposal is unlikely to yield effective barriers to proliferation or a sharp line between human rights and other moral norms. The main reason is one that Griffin himself recognizes: the “generative capacities” of normative agency are “quite great.” Providing adequate protections of the three components of normative agency (autonomy, freedom, and minimal well-being) will encounter a lot of threats to these values and hence will require lots of rights.

Views that explain human rights in terms of the practical political roles that they play have had prominent advocates in recent decades. These “political” conceptions of human rights explain what human rights are by describing the things that they do . Two philosophers who have developed political conceptions are discussed in this section, namely, John Rawls and Charles Beitz (for helpful discussions of political conceptions and their alternatives see the collections of essays in Etinson 2018 and Maliks and Schaffer 2017).

Advocates of political conceptions of human rights are often agnostic or skeptical about universal moral rights while rejecting wholesale moral skepticism and thinking possible the provision of sound normative justifications for the content, normativity, and roles of human rights (for challenges to purely political views see Gilabert 2011, Liao and Etinson 2012, Sangiovanni 2017, and Waldron 2018).

John Rawls introduced the idea of a political conception of human rights in his book, The Law of Peoples (Rawls 1999). The basic idea is that we can understand what human rights are and what their justification requires by identifying the main roles they play in some political sphere. In The Law of Peoples this sphere is international relations (and, secondarily, national politics). Rawls was attempting a normative reconstruction of international law and politics within today’s international system, and this helps explain Rawls’s focus on how human rights function within this system.

Rawls says that human rights are a special class of urgent rights . He seems to accept the definition of human rights given in Section 1 above. Besides saying that human rights are rights that are high priority or “urgent,” Rawls also accepts that they are plural and universal. But Rawls was working on a narrower project than Gewirth and Griffin. The international human rights he was concerned with are also defined by their roles in helping define in various ways the normative structure of the global system. They provide content to other normative concepts such as legitimacy, sovereignty, permissible intervention, and membership in good standing in the international community.

According to Rawls the justificatory process for human rights is analogous to the one for principles of justice at the national level that he described in A Theory of Justice (Rawls 1971). Instead of asking about the terms of cooperation that free and equal citizens would agree to under fair conditions, we ask about the terms of cooperation that free and equal peoples or countries would agree to under fair conditions. We imagine representatives of the world’s countries meeting to choose the normative principles that constitute the basic international structure. These representatives are imagined to see the countries they represent as free (rightfully independent) and equal (equally worthy of respect and fair treatment). These representatives are also imagined to be choosing rationally in light of the fundamental interests of their country, to be reasonable in seeking to find and respect fair terms of cooperation, and impartial because they are behind a “veil of ignorance”—they lack information about the country they represent such as its size, wealth, and power. Rawls holds that under these conditions these representatives will unanimously choose principles for the global order that include some basic human rights (for further explanation of the global original position see the entries on John Rawls and original position ).

Rawls advocated a limited list of human rights, one that leaves out many fundamental freedoms, rights of political participation, and equality rights. He did this for two reasons. One is that he wanted a list that is plausible for all reasonable countries, not just liberal democracies. The second reason is that he viewed serious violations of human rights as triggering permissible intervention by other countries, and only the most important rights can play this role.

Leaving out protections for equality and democracy is a high price to pay for assigning human rights the role of making international intervention permissible when they are seriously violated. We can accommodate Rawls’underlying idea without paying that price. To accept the idea that countries engaging in massive violations of the most important human rights are not to be tolerated we do not need to follow Rawls in equating international human rights with a heavily-pruned list. Instead we can work up a view—which is needed for other purposes anyway—of which human rights are the weightiest and then assign the intervention-permitting role to this subset.

Charles Beitz’s account of human rights in The Idea of Human Rights (Beitz 2009) shares many similarities with Rawls’s but is much more fully developed. Like Rawls, Beitz deals with human rights only as they have developed in contemporary international human rights practice. Beitz suggests that we can develop an understanding of human rights by attending to “the practical inferences that would be drawn by competent participants in the practice from what they regard as valid claims of human rights.” Observations of what competent participants say and do inform the account of what human rights are. The focus is not on what human rights are at some deep philosophical level; it is rather on how they work by guiding actions within a recently emerged and still evolving discursive practice. The norms of the practice guide the interpretation and application of human rights, the appropriateness of criticism in terms of human rights, adjudication in human rights courts, and—perhaps most importantly—responding to serious violations of human rights. Beitz says that human rights are “matters of international concern” and that they are “potential triggers of transnational protective and remedial action.”

Beitz does not agree with Rawls’s view that these roles require an abbreviated list of human rights. He accepts that the requirements of human rights are weaker than the requirements of social justice at the national level, but denies that human rights are minimal or highly modest in other respects.

Beitz rightly suggests that a reasonable person can accept and use the idea of human rights without accepting any particular view about their foundations. It is less clear that he is right in suggesting that good justifications of human rights should avoid as far as possible controversial assumptions about religion, metaphysics, ideology, and intrinsic value (see the entry public reason ). Beitz emphasizes the practical good that human rights do, not their grounds in some underlying moral reality. This helps make human rights attractive to people from around the world with their diverse religious and philosophical traditions. The broad justification for human rights and their normativity that Beitz offers is that they protect “urgent individual interests against predictable dangers (”standard threats“) to which they are vulnerable under typical circumstances of life in a modern world order composed of independent states.”

3. Which Rights are Human Rights?

This section discusses the question of which rights belong on lists of human rights. The Universal Declaration’s list, which has had great influence, consists of six families: (1) Security rights that protect people against murder, torture, and genocide; (2) Due process rights that protect people against arbitrary and excessively harsh punishments and require fair and public trials for those accused of crimes; (3) Liberty rights that protect people’s fundamental freedoms in areas such as belief, expression, association, and movement; (4) Political rights that protect people’s liberty to participate in politics by assembling, protesting, voting, and serving in public office; (5) Equality rights that guarantee equal citizenship, equality before the law, and freedom from discrimination; and (6) Social rights that require that governments ensure to all the availability of work, education, health services, and an adequate standard of living. A seventh category, minority and group rights, has been created by subsequent treaties. These rights protect women, racial and ethnic minorities, indigenous peoples, children, migrant workers, and the disabled.

Not every question of social justice or wise governance is a human rights issue. For example, a country could have too many lawyers or inadequate provision for graduate-level education without violating any human rights. Deciding which norms should be counted as human rights is a matter of considerable difficulty. And there is continuing pressure to expand lists of human rights to include new areas. Many political movements would like to see their main concerns categorized as matters of human rights, since this would publicize, promote, and legitimize their concerns at the international level. A possible result of this is “human rights inflation,” the devaluation of human rights caused by producing too much bad human rights currency (See Cranston 1973, Orend 2002, Wellman 1999, Griffin 2008).

One way to avoid rights inflation is to follow Cranston in insisting that human rights only deal with extremely important goods, protections, and freedoms. A supplementary approach is to impose several justificatory tests for specific human rights. For example, it could be required that a proposed human right not only protect some very important good but also respond to one or more common and serious threats to that good (Dershowitz 2004, Donnelly 2003, Shue 1996, Talbott 2005), impose burdens on the addressees that are justifiable and no larger than necessary, and be feasible in most of the world’s countries (on feasibility see Gilabert 2009 and Nickel 2007). This approach restrains rights inflation with several tests, not just one master test.

In deciding which specific rights are human rights it is possible to make either too little or too much of international documents such as the Universal Declaration and the European Convention. One makes too little of them by proceeding as if drawing up a list of important rights were a new question, never before addressed, and as if there were no practical wisdom to be found in the choices of rights that went into the historic documents. And one makes too much of them by presuming that those documents tell us everything we need to know about human rights. This approach involves a kind of fundamentalism: it holds that when a right is on the official lists of human rights that settles its status as a human right (“If it’s in the book that’s all I need to know.”) But the process of identifying human rights in the United Nations and elsewhere was a political process with plenty of imperfections. There is little reason to take international diplomats as the most authoritative guides to which human rights there are. Further, even if a treaty’s ratification by most countries can settle the question of whether a certain right is a human right within international law, such a treaty cannot settle its weight. The treaty may suggest that the right is supported by weighty considerations, but it cannot make this so. If an international treaty enacted a right to visit national parks without charge as a human right, the ratification of that treaty would make free access to national parks a human right within international law. But it would not be able to make us believe that the right to visit national parks without charge was sufficiently important to be a real human right (see Luban 2015).

The least controversial family of human rights is civil and political rights. These rights are familiar from historic bills of rights such as the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen (1789) and the U.S. Bill of Rights (1791, with subsequent amendments). Contemporary sources include the first 21 Articles of the Universal Declaration , and treaties such as the European Convention , the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights , the American Convention on Human Rights, and the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights . Some representative formulations follow:

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought and expression. This right includes freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing, in print, in the form of art, or through any other medium of one’s choice. (American Convention on Human Rights, Article 13.1)

Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests (European Convention, Article 11).

Every citizen shall have the right to participate freely in the government of his country, either directly or through freely chosen representatives in accordance with the provisions of the law. 2. Every citizen shall have the right of equal access to the public service of his country. 3. Every individual shall have the right of access to public property and services in strict equality of all persons before the law (African Charter, Article 13).

Most civil and political rights are not absolute—they can in some cases be overridden by other considerations. For example, the right to freedom of movement can be restricted by public and private property rights, by restraining orders related to domestic violence, and by legal punishments. Further, after a disaster such as a hurricane or earthquake free movement is often appropriately suspended to keep out the curious, permit access of emergency vehicles and equipment, and prevent looting. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights permits rights to be suspended during times “of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation” (Article 4). But it excludes some rights from suspension including the right to life, the prohibition of torture, the prohibition of slavery, the prohibition of ex post facto criminal laws, and freedom of thought and religion.

The Universal Declaration included social (or “welfare”) rights that address matters such as education, food, health services, and employment. Their inclusion has been the source of much controversy (see Beetham 1995). The European Convention did not include them (although it was later amended to include the right to education). Instead they were put into a separate treaty, the European Social Charter . When the United Nations began the process of putting the rights of the Universal Declaration into international law, it followed the same pattern by treating economic and social standards in a treaty separate from the one dealing with civil and political rights. This treaty, the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (the “Social Covenant,” 1966), treated these standards as rights—albeit rights to be progressively realized.

The Social Covenant’s list of rights includes nondiscrimination and equality for women in economic and social life (Articles 2 and 3), freedom to work and opportunities to work (Article 4), fair pay and decent conditions of work (Article 7), the right to form trade unions and to strike (Article 8), social security (Article 9), special protections for mothers and children (Article 10), the right to adequate food, clothing, and housing (Article 11), the right to basic health services (Article 12), the right to education (Article 13), and the right to participate in cultural life and scientific progress (Article 15).

Article 2.1 of the Social Covenant sets out what each of the parties commits itself to do about this list, namely to “take steps, individually and through international assistance and co-operation…to the maximum of its available resources, with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the rights recognized in the present Covenant.” In contrast, the Civil and Political Covenant commits its signatories to immediate compliance, to “respect and to ensure to all individuals within its territory the rights recognized in the present Covenant” (Article 2.1). The contrast between these two levels of commitment has led some people to suspect that economic and social rights are really just valuable goals. Why did the Social Covenant opt for progressive implementation and thereby treat its rights as being somewhat like goals? The main reason is that many of the world’s countries lacked the economic, institutional, and human resources to realize these standards fully or even largely. For many countries, noncompliance due to inability would have been certain if these standards had been treated as immediately binding.

Social rights have often been defended with linkage arguments that show the support they provide to adequate realization of civil and political rights. This approach was first developed philosophically by Henry Shue (Shue 1996; see also Nickel 2007 and 2016). Linkage arguments defend controversial rights by showing the indispensable or highly useful support they provide to uncontroversial rights. For example, if a government succeeds in eliminating hunger and providing education to everyone this promotes people’s abilities to know, use, and enjoy their liberties, due process rights, and rights of political participation. Lack of education is frequently a barrier to the realization of civil and political rights because uneducated people often do not know what rights they have and what they can do to use and defend them. Lack of education is also a common barrier to democratic participation. Education and a minimum income make it easier for people near the bottom economically to follow politics, participate in political campaigns, and to spend the time and money needed to go to the polls and vote.

Do social rights yield a sufficient commitment to equality? Objections to social rights as human rights have come from both the political right and the political left. A common objection from the left, including liberal egalitarians and socialists, is that social rights as enumerated in human rights documents and treaties provide too weak of a commitment to material equality (Moyn 2018; Gilabert 2015). Realizing social rights requires a state that ensures to everyone an adequate minimum of resources in some key areas but that does not necessarily have strong commitments to equality of opportunity, to strong redistributive taxation, and to ceilings on wealth (see the entries equality , equality of opportunity , distributive justice , and liberal feminism ).

The egalitarian objection cannot be that human rights documents and treaties showed no concern for people living in poverty and misery. That would be wildly false. One of the main purposes of including social rights in human rights documents and treaties was to promote serious efforts to combat poverty, lack of education, and unhealthy living conditions in countries all around the world (see also Langford 2013 on the UN Millennium Development Goals). The objection also cannot be that human rights facilitated the hollowing out of systems of welfare rights in many developed countries that occurred after 1980. Those cuts in welfare programs were often in violation of the requirements of adequately realizing social rights.

Perhaps it should be conceded that human rights documents and treaties have not said enough about positive measures to promote equal opportunity in education and work. A positive right to equal opportunity, like the one Rawls proposed, would require countries to take serious measures to reduce disparities between the opportunities effectively available to children of high-income and low-income parents (Rawls 1971).

A strongly egalitarian political program is best pursued partially within but mostly beyond the human rights framework. One reason for this is that the human rights movement will have better future prospects for acceptance and realization if it has widespread political support. That requires that the rights it endorses appeal to people with a variety of political views ranging from center-left to center-right. Support from the broad political center will not emerge and survive if the human rights platform is perceived as mostly a leftist program.

Do social rights protect sufficiently important human interests? Maurice Cranston opposed social rights by suggesting that social rights are mainly concerned with matters such as holidays with pay that are not matters of deep and universal human interests (Cranston 1967, 1973. Treatments of objections to social rights include Beetham 1995; Howard 1987; and Nickel 2007). It is far from the case, however, that most social rights pertain only to superficial interests. Consider two examples: the right to an adequate standard of living and the right to free public education. These rights require governments to try to remedy widespread and serious evils such as severe poverty, starvation and malnutrition, and ignorance. The importance of food and other basic material conditions of life is easy to show. These goods are essential to people’s ability to live, function, and flourish. Without adequate access to these goods, interests in life, health, and liberty are endangered and serious illness and death are probable. Lack of access to educational opportunities typically limits (both absolutely and comparatively) people’s abilities to participate fully and effectively in the political and economic life of their country.

Are social rights too burdensome? Another objection to social rights is that they are too burdensome on their dutybearers. It is very expensive to guarantee to everyone basic education and minimal material conditions of life. Frequently the claim that social rights are too burdensome uses other, less controversial human rights as a standard of comparison, and suggests that social rights are substantially more burdensome or expensive than liberty rights. Suppose that we use as a basis of comparison liberty rights such as freedom of communication, association, and movement. These rights require both respect and protection from governments. And people cannot be adequately protected in their enjoyment of liberties such as these unless they also have security and due process rights. The costs of liberty, as it were, include the costs of law and criminal justice. Once we see this, liberty rights start to look a lot more costly.

Further, we should not generally think of social rights as simply giving everyone a free supply of the goods they protect. Guarantees of things like food and housing will be intolerably expensive and will undermine productivity if everyone simply receives a free supply. A viable system of social rights will require most people to provide these goods for themselves and their families through work as long as they are given the necessary opportunities, education, and infrastructure. Government-implemented social rights provide guarantees of availability (or “secure access”), but governments should have to supply the requisite goods in only a small fraction of cases. Note that education is often an exception to this since many countries provide free public education irrespective of ability to pay.

Countries that do not accept and implement social rights still have to bear somehow the costs of providing for the needy since these countries—particularly if they recognize democratic rights of political participation—are unlikely to find it tolerable to allow sizeable parts of the population to starve and be homeless. If government does not supply food, clothing, and shelter to those unable to provide for themselves, then families, friends, and communities will have to shoulder this burden. It is only in the last hundred or so years that government-sponsored social rights have taken over a substantial part of the burden of providing for the needy. The taxes associated with social rights are partial replacements for other burdensome duties, namely the duties of families and communities to provide adequate care for the unemployed, sick, disabled, and aged. Deciding whether to implement social rights is not a matter of deciding whether to bear such burdens, but rather of deciding whether to continue with total reliance on a system of informal provision that distributes assistance in a very spotty way and whose costs fall very unevenly on families, friends, and communities.

Are social rights feasible worldwide? Another objection to social rights alleges that they are not feasible in many countries (on how to understand feasibility see Gilabert 2009). It is very expensive to provide guarantees of subsistence, measures to protect and restore people’s health, and education. Many governments will be unable to provide these guarantees while meeting other important responsibilities. Rights are not magical sources of supply (Holmes and Sunstein 1999).

As we saw earlier, the Social Covenant dealt with the issue of feasibility by calling for progressive implementation, that is, implementation as financial and other resources permit. Does this view of implementation turn social rights into high-priority goals? And if so, is that a bad thing?

Standards that outrun the abilities of many of their addressees are good candidates for treatment as goals. Viewing them as largely aspirational rather than as imposing immediate duties avoids problems of inability-based noncompliance. One may worry, however, that this is too much of a demotion for social rights because goals seem much weaker than rights. But goals can be formulated in ways that make them more like rights. They can be assigned addressees (the parties who are to pursue the goal), beneficiaries, scopes that define the objective to be pursued, and a high level of priority (see Langford 2013 and Nickel 2013; see also UN Human Rights and the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals ). Strong reasons for the importance of these goals can be provided. And supervisory bodies can monitor levels of progress and pressure low-performing addressees to attend to and work on their goals.

Treating very demanding rights as goals has several advantages. One is that proposed goals that greatly exceed our abilities are not so farcical as proposed duties that do so. Creating grand lists of social rights that many countries cannot presently realize seems farcical to many people. Perhaps this perceived lack of realism is reduced if we understand that these “rights” are really goals that countries should seriously promote. Goals coexist easily with low levels of ability to achieve them. Another advantage is that goals are flexible: addressees with different levels of ability can choose ways of pursuing the goals that suit their circumstances and means. Because of these attractions it may be worth exploring sophisticated ways to transform very demanding human rights into goals. The transformation may be full or partial. It is possible to create right-goal mixtures that contain some mandatory elements and that therefore seem more like real rights (see Brems 2009). A right-goal mixture might include some rights-like goals, some mandatory steps to be taken immediately, and duties to realize the rights-like goals as quickly as possible.

Equality of rights for historically disadvantaged or subordinated groups is a longstanding concern of the human rights movement. Human rights documents repeatedly emphasize that all people, including women and members of minority ethnic and religious groups, have equal human rights and should be able to enjoy them without discrimination. The right to freedom from discrimination figures prominently in the Universal Declaration and subsequent treaties. The Civil and Political Covenant, for example, commits participating states to respect and protect their people’s rights “without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth, or social status” (on minority and group rights see Kymlicka 1995, Nickel 2007).

A number of standard individual rights are especially important to ethnic and religious minorities, including rights to freedom of association, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, and freedom from discrimination. Human rights documents also include rights that refer to minorities explicitly and give them special protections. For example, the Civil and Political Covenant in Article 27 says that persons belonging to ethnic, religious, or linguistic minorities “shall not be denied the right, in community with other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practice their own religion, or to use their own language.”

Feminists have often protested that standard lists of human rights do not sufficiently take into account the different risks faced by women and men. For example, issues like domestic violence, reproductive choice, and trafficking of women and girls for sex work did not have a prominent place in early human rights documents and treaties. Lists of human rights have had to be expanded “to include the degradation and violation of women” (Bunch 2006, 58; see also Lockwood 2006 and Okin 1998). Violations of women’s human rights often occur in the home at the hands of other family members, not in the street at the hands of the police. Most violence against women occurs in the “private” sphere. This has meant that governments cannot be seen as the only addressees of human rights and that the right to privacy of home and family needs qualifications to allow police to protect women within the home.

The issue of how formulations of human rights should respond to variations in the sorts of risks and dangers that different people face is difficult and arises not just in relation to gender but also in relation to age, profession, political affiliation, religion, and personal interests. Due process rights, for example, are much more useful to young people (and particularly young men) than they are to older people since the latter are far less likely to run afoul of the criminal law.

Since 1964 the United Nations has mainly dealt with the rights of women and minorities through specialized treaties such as the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1965); the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (1979); the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2007). See also the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007). Specialized treaties allow international norms to address unique problems of particular groups such as assistance and care during pregnancy and childbearing in the case of women, custody issues in the case of children, and the loss of historic territories by indigenous peoples.

Minority groups are often targets of violence. Human rights norms call upon governments to refrain from such violence and to provide protections against it. This work is partly done by the right to life, which is a standard individual right. It is also done by the right against genocide which protects some groups from attempts to destroy or decimate them. The Genocide Convention was one of the first human rights treaties after World War II. The right against genocide is clearly a group right. It is held by both individuals and groups and provides protection to groups as groups. It is largely negative in the sense that it requires governments and other agencies to refrain from destroying groups; but it also requires that legal and other protections against genocide be created at the national level.

Can the right against genocide be a human right? More generally, can a group right fit the general idea of human rights proposed earlier? On that conception, human rights are rights of all persons . Perhaps it can, however, if we broaden our conception of who can hold human rights to include important groups that people form and cherish (see the entry on group rights ). This can be made more palatable, perhaps, by recognizing that the beneficiaries of the right against genocide are individual humans who enjoy greater security against attempts to destroy the group to which they belong (Kymlicka 1989).

In spite of the danger of rights inflation, there are doubtless norms that should be counted as human rights but are not generally recognized as such. After all, there are lots of areas in which people’s dignity and fundamental interests are threatened by the actions and omissions of individuals and governments. Consider environmental rights, which are often defined to include rights of animals or even of nature itself (see the entry on environmental ethics ). Conceived in this broad way environmental rights don’t have a good fit with the general idea of human rights because the rightholders are not humans or human groups.

Alternative formulations are possible, however. A basic environmental human right can be understood as requiring maintenance and restoration of an environment that is safe for human life and health. Many countries have environmental rights of this sort in their constitutional bills of rights (Hayward 2005). And the European Union’s Bill of Rights, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union , includes in Article 37 an environmental protection norm: “A high level of environmental protection and the improvement of the quality of the environment must be integrated into the policies of the Union and ensured in accordance with the principle of sustainable development.”

A human right to a safe environment or to environmental protection does not directly address issues such as the claims of animals or biodiversity, although it might do so indirectly using the idea of ecosystem services to humans (see Biodiversity and Human Rights . A justification for a human right to a safe environment should show that environmental problems pose serious threats to fundamental human interests, values, or norms; that governments may appropriately be burdened with the responsibility of protecting people against these threats; and that most governments actually have the ability to do this.

Climate change is currently a major environmental threat to many people’s lives and health, and hence it is unsurprising that human rights approaches to climate change have been developed and advocated in recent decades (see Bodansky 2011, Gardiner 2013, and UN Human Rights and Climate Change ). One approach, advocated by Steve Vanderheiden accepts the idea of a human right to an environment that is adequate for human life and health and derives from this broad right a more specific right to a stable climate (Vanderheiden 2008). Another approach, advocated by Simon Caney, does not require introducing a new environmental right. It suggests instead that serious action to reduce and mitigate climate change is required by already well-established human rights because severe climate change will violate many people’s rights to life, food, and health (Caney 2010). One could expand this approach by arguing that severe climate change should be reduced and mitigated because it will cause massive human migrations and other crises that will undermine the abilities of many governments to uphold human rights (for evaluation of these arguments see Bell 2013).

Two familiar philosophical worries about human rights are that they are based on moral beliefs that are culturally relative and that their creation and advocacy involves ethnocentrism. Human rights prescribe universal standards in areas such as security, law enforcement, equality, political participation, and education. The peoples and countries of planet Earth are, however, enormously varied in their practices, traditions, religions, and levels of economic and political development. Putting these two propositions together may be enough to justify the worry that universal human rights do not sufficiently accommodate the diversity of Earth’s peoples. A theoretical expression of this worry is “relativism,” the idea that ethical, political, and legal standards for a particular country or region are mostly shaped by the traditions, beliefs, and conditions of that country or region (see the entry on moral relativism ). The anthropologist William G. Sumner, writing in 1906, asserted that “the mores can make anything right and prevent condemnation of anything” (Sumner 1906).

Relativists sometimes accuse human rights advocates of ethnocentrism, arrogance, and cultural imperialism (Talbott 2005). Ethnocentrism is the assumption, usually unconscious, that “one’s own group is the center of everything” and that its beliefs, practices, and norms provide the standards by which other groups are “scaled and rated” (Sumner 1906; see also Etinson 2018 who argues that ethnocentrism is best understood as a kind of cultural bias rather than as a belief in cultural superiority). Ethnocentrism can lead to arrogance and intolerance in dealings with other countries, ethical systems, and religions. Finally, cultural imperialism occurs when the economically, technologically, and militarily strongest countries impose their beliefs, values, and institutions on the rest of the world. Relativists often combine these charges with a prescription, namely that tolerance of varied practices and traditions ought to be instilled and practiced through measures that include extended learning about other cultures.

The conflict between relativists and human rights advocates may be partially based on differences in their underlying philosophical beliefs, particularly in metaethics. Relativists are often subjectivists or noncognitivists and think of morality as entirely socially constructed and transmitted. In contrast, philosophically-inclined human rights advocates are more likely to adhere to or presuppose cognitivism, moral realism , and intuitionism .

During the drafting in 1947 of the Universal Declaration, the Executive Board of the American Anthropological Association warned of the danger that the Declaration would be “a statement of rights conceived only in terms of the values prevalent in Western Europe and America.” Perhaps the main concern of the AAA Board in the period right after World War II was to condemn the intolerant colonialist attitudes of the day and to advocate cultural and political self-determination. But the Board also made the stronger assertion that “standards and values are relative to the culture from which they derive” and thus “what is held to be a human right in one society may be regarded as anti-social by another people” ( American Anthropological Association Statement on Human Rights 1947 ).

This is not, of course, the stance of most anthropologists today. Currently the American Anthropological Association has a Committee on Human Rights whose objectives include promoting and protecting human rights and developing an anthropological perspective on human rights. While still emphasizing the importance of cultural differences, anthropologists now often support cultural survival and the protection of vulnerable cultures, non-discrimination, and the rights and land claims of indigenous peoples.

The idea that relativism and exposure to other cultures promote tolerance may be correct from a psychological perspective. People who are sensitive to differences in beliefs, practices, and traditions, and who are suspicious of the grounds for extending norms across borders, may be more inclined to be tolerant of other countries and peoples than those who believe in an objective universal morality. Still, philosophers have been generally critical of attempts to argue from relativism to a prescription of tolerance (Talbott 2005). If the culture and religion of one country has long fostered intolerant attitudes and practices, and if its citizens and officials act intolerantly towards people from other countries, they are simply following their own traditions and cultural norms. They are just doing what relativists think people mostly do. Accordingly, a relativist from a tolerant country will be hard-pressed to find a basis for criticizing the citizens and officials of the intolerant country. To do so the relativist will have to endorse a transcultural principle of tolerance and to advocate as an outsider cultural change in the direction of greater tolerance. Because of this, relativists who are deeply committed to tolerance may find themselves attracted to a qualified commitment to human rights.

East Asia is the region of the world that participates least in the international human rights system—even though some important East Asian countries such as Japan and South Korea do participate. In the 1990s Singapore’s Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew and others argued that international human rights as found in United Nations declarations and treaties were insensitive to distinctive “Asian values” such as prizing families and community (in contrast to strong individualism); putting social harmony over personal freedom; respect for political leaders and institutions; and emphasizing responsibility, hard work, and thriftiness as means of social progress (on the Asian Values debate see Bauer and Bell 1999; Bell 2000; Sen 1997; and Twining 2009). Proponents of the Asian values idea did not wish to abolish all human rights; they rather wanted to deemphasize some families of human rights, particularly the fundamental freedoms and rights of democratic participation (and in some cases the rights of women). They also wanted Western governments and NGOs to stop criticizing them for human rights violations in these areas.

At the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna, countries including Singapore, Malaysia, China, and Iran advocated accommodations within human rights practice for cultural and economic differences. Western representatives tended to view the position of these countries as excuses for repression and authoritarianism. The Conference responded by approving the Vienna Declaration . It included in Article 5 the assertion that countries should not pick and choose among human rights: “All human rights are universal, indivisible and interdependent and interrelated. The international community must treat human rights globally in a fair and equal manner, on the same footing, and with the same emphasis. While the significance of national and regional particularities and various historical, cultural and religious backgrounds must be borne in mind, it is the duty of States, regardless of their political, economic and cultural systems, to promote and protect all human rights and fundamental freedoms.”

Perhaps the debate about relativism and human rights has become obsolete. In recent decades widespread acceptance of human rights has occurred in most parts of the world. Three quarters of the world’s countries have ratified the major human rights treaties, and many countries in Africa, the Americas, and Europe participate in regional human rights regimes that have international courts (see Georgetown University Human Rights Law Research Guide in the Other Internet Resources below). Further, all of the world’s countries now use similar political institutions (law, courts, legislatures, executives, militaries, bureaucracies, police, prisons, taxation, and public schools) and these institutions carry with them characteristic problems and abuses (Donnelly 2003). Finally, globalization has diminished the differences among peoples. Today’s world is not the one that early anthropologists and missionaries found. National and cultural boundaries are breached not just by international trade but also by millions of travelers and migrants, electronic communications, international law covering many areas, and the efforts of international governmental and non-governmental organizations. International influences and organizations are everywhere and countries borrow freely and regularly from each other’s inventions and practices.

Worldwide polls on attitudes towards human rights are now available and they show broad support for human rights and international efforts to promote them. Empirical research can now replace or supplement theoretical speculations about how much disagreement on human rights exists worldwide. A December 2011 report by the Council on Foreign Relations surveyed recent international opinion polls on human rights that probe agreement and disagreement with propositions such as “People have the right to express any opinion,” “People of all faiths can practice their religion freely,” “Women should have the same rights as men,” “People of different races [should be] treated equally,” and governments “should be responsible for ensuring that [their] citizens can meet their basic need for food.” Big majorities of those polled in countries such as Argentina, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Egypt, Iran, Kenya, Nigeria, China, India, and Indonesia gave affirmative answers. Further, large majorities (on average 70%) in all the countries polled supported UN efforts to promote the human rights set out in the Universal Declaration. Unfortunately, popular acceptance of human rights ideas has not, however, prevented a recent slide in many of these same countries towards authoritarianism.

Ashford, E., 2015, “A Moral Inconsistency Argument for a Basic Human Right to Subsistence,” in Cruft, R., Liao, S., and Renzo, M. (eds.), Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Beetham, D., 1995, “What Future for Economic and Social Rights?”, Political Studies , 43: 41–60.
Beitz, C., 2015, “The Force of Subsistence Rights,” in Cruft, R., Liao, S., and Renzo, M. (eds.), 2015, Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
––– 2009, The Idea of Human Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bell, D., 2013, “Climate Change and Human Rights.” WIREs Climate Change , 4: 159–170.
Besson, S., “Human Rights and Constitutional Law: Patterns of Mutual Validation and Legitimation,” in Cruft, R., Liao, S., and Renzo, M. (eds.), 2015, Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Beyleveld, D., 1991, Dialectical Necessity of Morality: An Analysis and Defense of Alan Gewirth’s Argument to the Principle of Generic Consistency , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bodansky, D., 2010, “Introduction: Climate Change and Human Rights: Unpacking the Issues,” Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law , 38: 511–524.
Boylan, M. (ed.), 1999, Gewirth: Critical Essays on Action, Rationality, and Community , Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Brandt, R. B., 1983, “The Concept of a Moral Right,” Journal of Philosophy , 80: 29–45.
Brems, E., 2009, “Human Rights: Minimum and Maximum Perspectives,” Human Rights Law Review , 9: 343–372.
Brownlee, K., 2013, “A Human Right Against Social Deprivation,” Philosophical Quarterly , 63: 251, 199–222.
––– 2015, “Do We Have a Human Right to the Political Determinants of Health,” in Cruft, R., Liao, S., and Renzo, M. (eds.), Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Buchanan, A., 2010, Human Rights, Legitimacy, and the Use of Force , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
–––, 2013, The Heart of Human Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bunch, C., 2006, “Women’s Rights as Human Rights,” in B. Lockwood (ed.), Women’s Rights: A Human Rights Quarterly Reader , Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Caney S., 2010, “Climate Change, Human Rights and Moral Thresholds,” in Humphreys, S. (ed.), Human Rights and Climate Change , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, J., 2012, Globalization and Sovereignty , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, J., 2004, “Minimalism About Human Rights: The Most We Can Hope For?”, Journal of Political Philosophy , 12: 90–213.
Claude, R. and Weston, B. (eds.), 2006, Human Rights in the World Community , 3rd edition, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Corradetti, C., 2009, Relativism and Human Rights , New York: Springer.
––– (ed.), 2012, Philosophical Dimensions of Human Rights , New York: Springer.
Cranston, M., 1967, “Human Rights, Real and Supposed,” in D. D. Raphael (ed.), Political Theory and the Rights of Man , London: Macmillan.
–––, 1973, What Are Human Rights? , London: Bodley Head.
Cruft, R., 2012, “Human Rights as Rights,” in Ernst, G. and Heilinger, J. (eds.), 2011, The Philosophy of Human Rights: Contemporary Controversies , Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
–––, 2019, Human Rights, Ownership, and the Individual , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
–––, Liao, S., and Renzo, M. (eds.), 2015, Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dershowitz, A., 2004, Rights from Wrongs: A Secular Theory of the Origins of Rights , New York: Basic Books.
Donnelly, J., 2012, International Human Rights , 4th edition, Philadelphia: Westview Press.
–––, 2013, Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice , 3rd edition, Ithaca, NY and London: Cornell University Press.
Dworkin, R., 2011, Justice for Hedgehogs , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
––– 1978, Taking Rights Seriously , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Ernst, G. and Heilinger, J. (eds.), 2011, The Philosophy of Human Rights: Contemporary Controversies , Berlin: De Gruyter.
Etinson, A. (ed.), 2018, Human Rights: Moral or Political? , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
–––, 2018, “Some Myths about Ethnocentrism,” Australian Journal of Philosophy , 96: 209–224.
Feinberg, J., 1973, Social Philosophy , Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Fellmeth, A., 2016, Paradigms of International Human Rights Law , New York: Oxford University Press
Finnis, J., 2015, “Grounding Human Rights in Natural Law,” American Journal of Jurisprudence , 60(2): 199–225.
––– 2011, Natural Law and Natural Rights , 2nd edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Follesdal, A. 2018, “Appreciating the Margin of Appreciation,” in Etinson, A. (ed.), Human Rights: Moral or Political? , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gardiner, S., 2013, “Human Rights in a Hostile Climate,” in Holder, C., and Reidy, D. (eds.), 2013, Human Rights: The Hard Questions , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gewirth, A., 1978, Reason and Morality , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
–––, 1982, Human Rights: Essays on Justification and Applications , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
–––, 1996, The Community of Rights , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gilabert, P., 2018, Human Dignity and Human Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
–––2009, “The Feasibility of Basic Socioeconomic Rights: A Conceptual Exploration,” The Philosophical Quarterly , 59: 559–581.
–––2011, “Humanist and Political Perspectives on Human Rights,” Political Theory , 39: 439–467.
––– 2018, “Reflections on Human Rights and Power,” in Etinson, A. (ed.), Human Rights: Moral or Political? , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Glendon, M., 2001, A World Made New: Eleanor Roosevelt and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights , New York: Random House.
Gould, C., 2004, Globalizing Democracy and Human Rights , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Griffin, J., 2008, On Human Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hart, H., 1955, “Are There Any Natural Rights?” Philosophical Review , 64: 175–191.
Hayden, P. (ed.), 2001, The Philosophy of Human Rights , St. Paul, MN: Paragon Press.
Hayward, T., 2005, Constitutional Environmental Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Henkin, L., 1978, The Rights of Man Today , Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Holder C., and Reidy, D. (eds.), 2013, Human Rights: The Hard Questions , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Holmes, S. and Sunstein, C., 1999, The Cost of Rights: Why Liberty Depends on Taxes , New York: Norton.
Howard, R., 1987, “The Full-Belly Thesis: Should Economic Rights Take Priority Over Civil and Political Rights?” Human Rights Quarterly , 5: 467–90.
Ignatieff, M., 2004, The Lesser Evil, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Kateb, G., 2011, Human Dignity , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kennedy, D., 2004, The Dark Sides of Virtue: Reassessing International Humanitarianism, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
King, J., 2012, Judging Social Rights , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kymlicka, W., 1989, Liberalism, Community, and Culture , Oxford: Clarendon Press.
––– (ed.), 1995, The Rights of Minority Cultures , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lacrois, J. and Pranchere, J., 2016, Human Rights on Trial: A Genealogy of the Critique of Human Rights , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lafont, C., 2013, Global Governance and Human Rights , Amsterdam: Van Gorcum.
Langford, M. et al. (eds.), 2013, The Millennium Development Goals and Human Rights , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lauren, P., 2003, The Evolution of International Human Rights , 2nd edition, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Liao, M. and Etinson, A., 2012, “Political and Naturalistic Conceptions of Human Rights: A False Polemic?”, Journal of Moral Philosophy , 9: 327–352.
Locke, J., 1689, The Second Treatise on Civil Government , New York: Prometheus Books, 1986.
Lockwood, B. (ed.), 2006, Women’s Rights: A Human Rights Quarterly Reader , Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Luban, D., 2015, “Human Rights Pragmatism and Human Dignity,” in Cruft, R., Liao, S., and Renzo, M. (eds.), 2015, Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Maliks, R. and Schaffer, J. (eds.), 2017, Moral and Political Conceptions of Human Rights , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Meyers, D., 1985, Inalienable Rights: A Defense , New York: Columbia University Press.
–––, 2016, Victims’ Stories and the Advancement of Human Rights , New York: Oxford University Press.
Miller, D., 2012, “Grounding Human Rights,” Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy , 15: 207–227.
Miller, R., 2010, Global Justice: The Ethics of Poverty and Power , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Morsink, J., 1999, Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Origins, Drafting, and Intent , Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
–––, 2009, Inherent Human Rights: Philosophical Roots of the Universal Declaration , Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Moyn, S., 2010, The Last Utopia: Human Rights in History , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
––– 2018, Not Enough: Human Rights in an Unequal World , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Mutua, M., 2008, Human Rights: A Political and Cultural Critique , Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press.
Nickel, J., 2018, “Assigning Functions to Human Rights: Methodological Issues in Human Rights Theory,” in Etinson, A. (ed.), Human Rights: Moral or Political? , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
–––, 2016, “Can a Right to Health Care be Justified by Linkage Arguments?”, Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics , 37 (4): 293–306.
–––, 2007, Making Sense of Human Rights , 2nd edition., Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
–––, 2008, “Rethinking Indivisibility: Towards a Theory of Supporting Relations Between Human Rights,” Human Rights Quarterly , 30: 984–1001.
–––, 2013, “Goals and Rights—Working Together?”, in M. Langford, et al., The MDGs and Human Rights: Past, Present, and Future , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nozick, R., 1974, Anarchy, State, and Utopia , New York: Basic Books.
Nussbaum, M., 2000, Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
–––, 2007, Frontiers of Justice , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Okin, S., 1998, “Feminism, Women’s Human Rights, and Cultural Differences,” Hypatia , 13: 32–52.
O’Neill, O., 1986, Faces of Hunger: An Essay on Poverty, Development and Justice , London: Allen and Unwin.
–––, 2005, “The Dark Side of Human Rights,” International Affairs , 81: 427–439.
Orend, B., 2002, Human Rights: Concept and Context , Peterborough, Ont.: Broadview Press.
Pogge, T., 2002, World Poverty and Human Rights: Cosmopolitan Responsibilities and Reforms , Cambridge: Polity Press.
Rawls, J., 1971, A Theory of Justice , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
–––, 1999, The Law of Peoples , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Raz, J., 2010, “Human Rights Without Foundations,” in Besson, S., and Tasioulas, J. (eds.), The Philosophy of International Law , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Reinbold, J., 2017, Seeing the Myth in Human Rights , Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Rorty, R., 2012, “Human Rights, Rationality, and Sentimentality,” in Cistelecan, A., and Rathore, A. (eds.), Wronging Rights? Philosophical Challenges for Human Rights , London: Taylor and Francis.
Sangiovanni, A., 2017, Humanity Without Dignity: Moral Equality, Respect, and Human Rights, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Sen, A., 2004, “Elements of a Theory of Human Rights,” Philosophy & Public Affairs , 32: 315–356.
–– 1997, Human Rights and Asian Values, New York: Carnegie Council on Ethics and International Affairs.
Shue, H., 1996, Basic Rights , 2nd edition, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Simmons, B., 2009, Mobilizing for Human Rights: International Law and Domestic Politics , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sumner, L., 1987, The Moral Foundation of Rights , Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Sumner, W., 1906, Folkways: A Study of the Sociological Importance of Usages, Manners, Customs, Mores, and Morals , Boston: Ginn and Co.
Talbott, W., 2010, Human Rights and Human Well-Being , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
––Talbott, W., 2005, Which Rights Should be Universal? , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tasioulas, J., 2015, “On the Foundations of Human Rights,” in R. Cruft, S. Liao, and M. Renzo (eds.), Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
–– 2012, “On the Nature of Human Rights,” in Ernst, G. and Heilinger, J. (eds.), 2011, The Philosophy of Human Rights: Contemporary Controversies , Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Tomalty, J., 2016, “Justifying International Legal Human Rights,” Ethics and International Affairs, 30: 483–490.
Tomasi, J., 2012, Free Market Fairness , Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Tierney, B., 1997, The Idea of Natural Rights , Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Erdmans Publishing Co.
Tuck, W., 1979, Natural Rights Theories: Their Origin and Development , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Teson, F., 2005, Humanitarian Intervention: An Inquiry into Law and Morality , Ardsley, NY: Transnational.
Thomson, J., 1990, The Realm of Rights , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vanderheiden, S., 2008, Atmospheric Justice: A Political Theory of Climate Change, New York: Oxford University Press.
Waldron, J., 2018, “Human Rights: A Critique of the Raz/Rawls Approach,” in Etinson, A. (ed.), Human Rights: Moral or Political?, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
–––, 1993, Liberal Rights , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
––– (ed.), 1987, Nonsense Upon Stilts: Bentham, Burke and Marx on the Rights of Man , London: Methuen.
Wellman, C., 1995, Real Rights , New York: Oxford University Press.
–––, 1998, The Proliferation of Rights: Moral Progress or Empty Rhetoric? , Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
–––, 2010, The Moral Dimensions of Human Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wenar, L., 2015, Blood Oil , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wolff, J., 2015, “The Content of the Human Right to Health,” in Cruft, R., Liao, S., and Renzo, M. (eds.), Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wolterstorff, N., 2008, Justice: Rights and Wrongs , Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Corradetti, C. (ed.), 2012, Philosophical Dimensions of Human Rights , New York: Springer.
Crisp, R. (ed.), 2014, Griffin on Human Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cruft, R., Liao, S., and Renzo, M. (eds.), 2015, Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Holder, C. and Reidy, D., (eds.), 2013, Human Rights: The Hard Questions , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Maliks, R. and Schaffer, J., (eds.) 2017, Moral and Political Conceptions of Human Rights , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

Other Internet Resources

Georgetown Law Library Human Rights Law Research Guide
United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
University of Minnesota Human Rights Library .
Francisco Suarez (1548–1617), entry in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy .
Human Rights entry in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy .

Acknowledgments

The assistance of Adam Etinson, Pablo Gilabert, and Erin Sperry is acknowledged with gratitude.

Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

Info about mirror sites

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

We're Hiring!
Help Center

Human Rights: A Brief Introduction

Related Papers

Maryland Journal of International Law

Stephen Marks

Jacob Mchangama

The United Nations Special Procedures system was described by former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan as " the crown jewel " of the UN Human Rights Machinery. Yet, in recent years, the system has expanded rapidly, driven by states creating new mandates frequently on topics not traditionally viewed as human rights. This article explores the connection between forms of governance and the states voting for and promoting these newer mandates. We explore states' potential motivations for expanding the system and the impact on international human rights law. This article forms an important part of discussions about Special Procedures and rights proliferation.

University of New …

andrew Byrnes

We are pleased to present you with our Report on the findings of the ACT Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Research Project. ... 3. Chapter 3: What are economic, social and cultural rights?..........................................................43 ... 4. Chapter 4: The content of economic, ...

Australian Journal of Human Rights

Dr Dorothea Anthony

The 1993 World Conference on Human Rights (World Conference) and its Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action remain as instrumental to international human rights law and discourse in today’s world as they were in the aftermath of the Cold War, chiefly because the World Conference’s underlying ideologies remain relevant. Despite its formal commitment to the indivisibility principle, the World Conference promulgated ideas that were products of global post-Cold War economic conditions, including civil and political rights, democracy, and liberalism. Current conditions continue to reinforce these ideas. Indeed, as long as these conditions persist, the human rights community is likely to embrace the “Viennese” concept of rights.

Melizel Asuncion

When the Southeast Asian Human Rights Studies Network (SEAHRN) was formed in 2009 one of its first activities was the development of a textbook for Southeast Asia students. This was in response to its objective of improving teaching on human rights in Southeast Asian universities. Given that education on human rights is a human right itself, and that few students graduate from university with any knowledge of human rights, there is much work to do. Many lecturers at Southeast Asian universities spoke of the frustration of not having textbooks appropriate for their courses. While there are many excellent human rights textbooks available, they do not always suit the needs of students in Southeast Asian universities. Translation is a big problem, as nearly all undergraduate students study in their national language. The cost of a textbook is another challenge, as they can cost the equivalent of a month’s living allowance for the average undergraduate student. Further, most textbooks do...

An Introduction to Human Rights in Southeast Asia

Hadi Rahmat Purnama

Matthew Mullen

In, Rikke Frank Jørgensen, ed., Human Rights in the Global Information Society. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press, pp. 1-49.

William J Drake

Mashood Baderin

This thesis examines the important question of whether or not Islamic law and international human rights are compatible and whether Muslim States can comply with international human rights law while they still adhere to Islamic law. The traditional arguments on the subject are examined and responded to from both international human rights and Islamic legal perspectives. The thesis formulates a synthesis between two extremes and argues that although there are some differences of scope and application, that does not create a general state of dissonance between Islamic law and international human rights law. It is argued that the differences would be easier to address if the concept of human rights were positively established from within the themes of Islamic law rather than imposing it as a concept alien to Islamic law. To avoid a simplistic generalisation of the arguments, each Article of the international bill of rights (ICCPR and ICESCR) and some relevant articles of the Convention...

RELATED PAPERS

Aishwarya Parthasarathy

Strategic Studies Amnesty International NL

Eduardo Arenas Catalán

Strategic Studies Amnesty International NL , Doutje Lettinga

Doctor.Md. Oliul Islam

Radical Teacher

clever bhatti

Edrine Wanyama

Aida Samadli

Pakistan Law House

Zafarullah Khan

UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd (Jackie Dugard, Bruce Porter, Daniela Ikawa and Lilian Chenwi, eds)

Daniela Ikawa

Klaus Dieter Beiter

Patience Maingi

Foster Tawiah

Amjad Nazeer

Elena Crespi , Sylvain Aubry , Matthias Sant'Ana

Advancing the Human Right to Health

Ana M G Martins

African Human Rights Law Journal

Bukola Ruth Akinbola

Tumi Mmusinyane

sharon hofisi

Nayeem Firoz

Prof. Assoc. Dr. Jordan Daci

Dr.Sc. Skender Gojani

Prof T S N Sastry

Akshay Subash

Kenneth Hermele

Catherine Morris

Pablo Veyrat

Jason Morgan-Foster

Dinesh Goswami

Journal of Human Rights and Social Work

Nancy Kusmaul

Marlen van den Ecker

American Journal of International Law

Right to education handbook

Erica Murphy

Carmela Chavez Irigoyen

University of Cape Coast Law Journal

Olusola Adegbite

Grietje Baars

Welcome to the Human Rights E-Course

Thank you for enrolling! You’re about to see videos and read material that will illustrate and bring to life all 30 of your basic human rights. You can track your progress through the course, and every time you sign out, you can pick up where you left off when you sign in again.

Now, press the Continue button to take the first step.

Human Rights, An Introduction

Human rights defined.

What are your human rights?

Let’s start with some basic human rights definitions:

Human: noun A member of the Homo sapiens species; a man, woman or child; a person.

Rights: noun Things to which you are entitled or allowed; freedoms that are guaranteed.

Human Rights: noun The rights you have simply because you are human.

If you were to ask people in the street, “What are human rights?” you would get many different answers. They would tell you the rights they know about, but very few people know all their rights.

As covered in the definitions above, a right is a freedom of some kind. It is something to which you are entitled by virtue of being human.

Human rights are based on the principle of respect for the individual. Their fundamental assumption is that each person is a moral and rational being who deserves to be treated with dignity. They are called human rights because they are universal. Whereas nations or specialized groups enjoy specific rights that apply only to them, human rights are the rights to which everyone is entitled—no matter who they are or where they live—simply because they are alive.

Yet many people, when asked to name their rights, will list only freedom of speech and belief and perhaps one or two others. There is no question these are important rights, but the full scope of human rights is very broad. They mean choice and opportunity. They mean the freedom to obtain a job, adopt a career, select a partner of one’s choice and raise children. They include the right to travel widely and the right to work gainfully without harassment, abuse and threat of arbitrary dismissal. They even embrace the right to leisure.

In ages past, there were no human rights. Then the idea emerged that people should have certain freedoms. And that idea, in the wake of World War II, resulted finally in the document called the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the thirty rights to which all people are entitled.

Thank you for subscribing!

Connect with us!

International Sites

Site navigation.

The United for Human Rights is a non-profit, international education program proudly sponsored by the Church of Scientology and Scientologists all over the world. To learn more, click here.

Please provide the email address you used when you signed up for your account.

We will send you an email with a link to reset your password.

Human Rights Essay for Students and Children

500+ words essay on human rights.

Human rights are a set of rights which every human is entitled to. Every human being is inherited with these rights no matter what caste, creed, gender, the economic status they belong to. Human rights are very important for making sure that all humans get treated equally. They are in fact essential for a good standard of living in the world.

Moreover, human rights safeguard the interests of the citizens of a country. You are liable to have human rights if you’re a human being. They will help in giving you a good life full of happiness and prosperity.

Human Rights Categories

Human rights are essentially divided into two categories of civil and political rights, and social rights. This classification is important because it clears the concept of human rights further. Plus, they also make humans realize their role in different spheres.

When we talk about civil and political rights , we refer to the classic rights of humans. These rights are responsible for limiting the government’s authority that may affect any individual’s independence. Furthermore, these rights allow humans to contribute to the involvement of the government. In addition to the determination of laws as well.

Next up, the social rights of people guide the government to encourage ways to plan various ways which will help in improving the life quality of citizens. All the governments of countries are responsible for ensuring the well-being of their citizens. Human rights help countries in doing so efficiently.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Importance of Human Rights

Human rights are extremely important for the overall development of a country and individuals on a personal level. If we take a look at the basic human rights, we see how there are right to life, the right to practice any religion, freedom of movement , freedom from movement and more. Each right plays a major role in the well-being of any human.

Right to life protects the lives of human beings. It ensures no one can kill you and thus safeguards your peace of mind. Subsequently, the freedom of thought and religion allows citizens to follow any religion they wish to. Moreover, it also means anyone can think freely.

Further, freedom of movement is helpful in people’s mobilization. It ensures no one is restricted from traveling and residing in any state of their choice. It allows you to grab opportunities wherever you wish to.

Next up, human rights also give you the right to a fair trial. Every human being has the right to move to the court where there will be impartial decision making . They can trust the court to give them justice when everything else fails.

Most importantly, humans are now free from any form of slavery. No other human being can indulge in slavery and make them their slaves. Further, humans are also free to speak and express their opinion.

In short, human rights are very essential for a happy living of human beings. However, these days they are violated endlessly and we need to come together to tackle this issue. The governments and citizens must take efforts to protect each other and progress for the better. In other words, this will ensure happiness and prosperity all over the world.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

Travelling Essay
Picnic Essay
Our Country Essay
My Parents Essay
Essay on Favourite Personality
Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
Essay on Knowledge is Power
Essay on Gurpurab
Essay on My Favourite Season
Essay on Types of Sports

Download the App

SCAM ALERT: We will never contact you requesting money. Learn more.

An introduction to human rights.

Human rights are a set of principles concerned with equality and fairness.

They are not a recent invention - ideas about rights and responsibilities have been an important part of all societies throughout history. Since the end of World War II, there has been a united effort by the nations of the world to decide what rights belong to all people and how they can best be promoted and protected.

Explore the sections below to find information about the important human rights questions:

What are human rights?

Where do human rights come from?

Why are human rights important, what are human rights.

Every person has dignity and value. One of the ways that we recognise the fundamental worth of every person is by acknowledging and respecting their human rights.

Human rights are a set of principles concerned with equality and fairness. They recognise our freedom to make choices about our lives and to develop our potential as human beings. They are about living a life free from fear, harassment or discrimination.

Human rights can broadly be defined as a number of basic rights that people from around the world have agreed are essential. These include the right to life, the right to a fair trial, freedom from torture and other cruel and inhuman treatment, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the rights to health, education and an adequate standard of living.

These human rights are the same for all people everywhere – men and women, young and old, rich and poor, regardless of our background, where we live, what we think or what we believe. This is what makes human rights ‘universal’.

Who has a responsibility to protect human rights?

Human rights connect us to each other through a shared set of rights and responsibilities.

A person’s ability to enjoy their human rights depends on other people respecting those rights. This means that human rights involve responsibility and duties towards other people and the community. Individuals have a responsibility to ensure that they exercise their rights with consideration for the rights of others. For example, when someone uses their right to freedom of speech, they should do so without interfering with someone else’s right to privacy.

Governments have a particular responsibility to ensure that people are able to enjoy their rights. They are required to establish and maintain laws and services that enable people to enjoy a life in which their rights are respected and protected.

For example, the right to education says that everyone is entitled to a good education. This means that governments have an obligation to provide good quality education facilities and services to their people. Whether or not governments actually do this, it is generally accepted that this is the government's responsibility and people can call them to account if they fail to respect or protect their basic human rights.

What do human rights cover?

Human rights cover virtually every area of human activity.

They include civil and political rights , which refer to a person’s rights to take part in the civil and political life of their community without discrimination or oppression. These include rights and freedoms such as the right to vote, the right to privacy, freedom of speech and freedom from torture.

The right to vote and take part in choosing a government is a civil and political right.

They also include economic, social and cultural rights , which relate to a person’s rights to prosper and grow and to take part in social and cultural activities. This group includes rights such as the right to health, the right to education and the right to work.

The right to education is an example of an economic, social and cultural right.

One of the main differences between these two groups of rights is that, in the case of civil and political rights, governments must make sure that they, or any other group, are not denying people access to their rights, whereas in relation to economic, social and cultural rights, governments must take active steps to ensure rights are being fulfilled.

As well as belonging to every individual, there are some rights that also belong to groups of people. This is often in recognition of the fact that these groups have been disadvantaged and marginalised throughout history and consequently need greater protection of their rights. These rights are called collective rights . For example, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples possess collective rights to their ancestral lands, which are known as native title rights.

Rights that can only apply to individuals, for example the right to a fair trial, are called individual rights .

Back to the top

The origins of human rights

Click here for a brief timeline of the evolution of human rights

Human rights are not a recent invention.

Throughout history, concepts of ethical behaviour, justice and human dignity have been important in the development of human societies. These ideas can be traced back to the ancient civilisations of Babylon, China and India. They contributed to the laws of Greek and Roman society and are central to Buddhist, Christian, Confucian, Hindu, Islamic and Jewish teachings. Concepts of ethics, justice and dignity were also important in societies which have not left written records, but consist of oral histories such as those of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australia and other indigenous societies elsewhere.

Ideas about justice were prominent in the thinking of philosophers in the Middle Ages, the Renaissance and the Enlightenment. An important strand in this thinking was that there was a 'natural law' that stood above the law of rulers. This meant that individuals had certain rights simply because they were human beings.

In 1215, the English barons forced the King of England to sign Magna Carta (which is Latin for ‘the Great Charter’). Magna Carta was the first document to place limits on the absolute power of the king and make him accountable to his subjects. It also laid out some basic rights for the protection of citizens, such as the right to a trial.

Significant development in thinking about human rights took place in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, during a time of revolution and emerging national identities.

The American Declaration of Independence (1776) was based on the understanding that certain rights, such as ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness', were fundamental to all people. Similarly, t he French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen (1789) challenged the authority of the aristocracy and recognised the ‘liberty, equality and fraternity' of individuals. These values were also echoed in the United States’ Bill of Rights (1791), which recognised freedom of speech, religion and the press, as well as the right to ‘peaceable' assembly, private property and a fair trial.

The English barons forcing the tyrannical King John to sign Magna Carta in 1215

Find out more about Magna Carta and its human rights legacy by watching this short video or exploring this interactive timeline .

The development of modern human rights

The nineteenth and early twentieth centuries saw continuing advances in social progress, for example, in the abolition of slavery, the widespread provision of education and the extension of political rights. Despite these advances, international activity on human rights remained weak. The general attitude was that nations could do what they liked within their borders and that other countries and the broader international community had no basis for intervening or even raising concerns when rights were violated.

This is expressed in the term ‘state sovereignty’, which refers to the idea that whoever has the political authority within a country has the power to rule and pass laws over that territory. Importantly, countries agree to mutually recognise this sovereignty. In doing so, they agree to refrain from interfering in the internal or external affairs of other sovereign states.

However, the atrocities and human rights violations that occurred during World War II galvanised worldwide opinion and made human rights a universal concern.

Word War II onwards

During World War II millions of soldiers and civilians were killed or maimed. The Nazi regime in Germany created concentration camps for certain groups - including Jews, communists, homosexuals and political opponents. Some of these people were used as slave labour, others were exterminated in mass executions. The Japanese occupation of China and other Asian countries was marked by frequent and large-scale brutality toward local populations. Japanese forces took thousands of prisoners of war who were used as slave labour, with no medical treatment and inadequate food.

A group of prisoners at a concentration camp during WWII in Ebensee, Austria

The promotion and protection of human rights became a fundamental objective of the Allied powers. In 1941, U.S. President Roosevelt proclaimed the 'Four Freedoms' that people everywhere in the world ought to enjoy - freedom of speech and belief, and freedom from want and fear.

The war ended in 1945, but only after the destruction of millions of lives, including through the first and only use of atomic weapons at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Many countries were devastated by the war, and millions of people died or became homeless refugees.

This new organisation was the United Nations, known as the UN, which came into existence in 1945. A s the war drew to a close, the victorious powers decided to establish a world organisation that would prevent further conflict and help build a better world.

The UN was created to fulfil four key aims:

to ensure peace and security
to promote economic development
t o promote the development of international law
to ensure the observance of human rights.

In the UN Charter – the UN’s founding document – the countries of the United Nations stated that they were determined:

The UN's strong emphasis on human rights made it different from previous international organisations. UN member countries believed that the protection of human rights would help ensure freedom, justice and peace for all in the future.

Read more about the work of United Nations on The International Human Rights System page .

Values of tolerance, equality and respect can help reduce friction within society. Putting human rights ideas into practice can helps us create the kind of society we want to live in.

In recent decades, there has been a tremendous growth in how we think about and apply human rights ideas. This has had many positive results - knowledge about human rights can empower individuals and offer solutions for specific problems.

Human rights are an important part of how people interact with others at all levels in society - in the family, the community, schools, the workplace, in politics and in international relations. It is vital therefore that people everywhere should strive to understand what human rights are. When people better understand human rights, it is easier for them to promote justice and the well-being of society.

Can my human rights be taken away from me?

A person's human rights cannot be taken away. In its final Article, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that no State, group or person '[has] any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein'.

This doesn't mean that abuses and violations of human rights don't occur. On television and in newspapers every day we hear tragic stories of murder, violence, racism, hunger, unemployment, poverty, abuse, homelessness and discrimination.

However, the Universal Declaration and other human rights treaties are more than just noble aspirations. They are essential legal principles. To meet their international human rights obligations, many nations have incorporated these principles into their own laws. This provides an opportunity for individuals to have a complaint settled by a court in their own country.

Individuals from some countries may also be able to take a complaint of human rights violations to a United Nations committee of experts, which would then give its opinion.

In addition, education about human rights is just as important as having laws to protect people. Long term progress can really only be made when people are aware of what human rights are and what standards exist.

The Origin of the Human Rights Concept Essay

Introduction, human rights as a worldwide construct, human rights as a western construct.

The spirit of human rights has been passed from generation to generation to generation either consciously or unconsciously. If today a person invokes the UN universal human rights declaration that was adopted in 1948 someone may think that this is an idea that has a universal agreement (United Nations, 1948).

The origin of human rights concept is usually a question that is politically charged because as countries or regions claim to be the inventors of the idea they end up accusing others as violators of human rights.

For instance, the US can claim to be promoting Human Rights (according to their definition of human rights) while at the same time accusing the USSR of abusing human rights (United Nations, Office Of The High Commissioner For Human Rights (OHCHR), 2008). This is always an attempt for certain countries to have their principles domineering over others.

There is an understanding that Human rights is a ‘western’ construct however, this is not true because there are various evidences that point to human rights as a worldwide creation with various societies having there own understanding. The following are reasons to explain why human rights did not only originate from the West (Ishay, 2004).

Ethics in the modern days have borrowed a lot from the religious and secular traditions all over the world. For instance, the idea of proportionately punishing offenders as well as giving due justice was found in various regions and traditions all over the world. These include the Code of Hummurabbi of ancient Babylon; Christianity, which promoted human solidarity as well as urged moral conduct during war time.

These were ideas shared also in Islam faith whereas there were other religions that were the first to defend the ecosystem such as the Hindu and the Buddhist. Lastly, the Hebrew bible upheld the sacredness of life and reciprocal entitlements. This clearly shows that human right was a concept understood and practiced worldwide even before the western cultures reached the other parts of the world (Lauren, 2003).

Some philosophical stands that rallied for the upholding of the dignity of each individual, promotion of ethical behaviour as well as social justice can be seen in various parts of the world before colonial powers arrived in those parts. For instance, in the third century B.C a leader of the Buddhist called Asoka provided freedom of worship under his rule in the sixteenth century, Chaitanya.

A Hindu Philosopher campaigned against the caste system which regarded other human beings as superior to others. He therefore urged for banning of the system to promote equality. This also shows that there were philosophers in ancient times who understood the concept of human rights more or less as it is explained today and went further to champion for its implementation (Ishay, 2004).

Some people may argue that most of what is contained in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights is developed from the western understanding of human rights. However, it is clear that it also envisions the practices of human rights that were carried out in ancient cultures of other parts of the world apart from the western world.

In fact, the process of developing the document began in 1947 by identifying common rights shared by human beings (worldwide), a task which was done by the human rights commission. They were to examine the struggle generations as well as generations of thought, whereby the examination was to start in the ancient times and religions.

This point out to the fact that there were rights in the document that are common to different parts of the world and that they were not only obtained from the western nations’ practices of human rights but also from other parts as well (Ishay, 2004).

The document that defines human rights according to the UN was composed of representatives of various countries of the world. For instance, the human Rights Commission had 18 members who were representatives of various governments. As a result, they promoted the views of their governments while contributing to the drafting of the document.

The members who were not from the western countries included, China, Cuba, the Soviet Union, Egypt, India and Yugoslavia. In addition, the negotiations were characterized with controversies as each country pushed for their own agenda. For instance, the British delegation did not want human rights matters to be included to the mandate of the UN.

Being a western country this faults the argument that only their views were captured in the document. Furthermore, the Chinese representative was a skilled diplomat and in many occasions came up with a solution when there was a deadlock in the negotiations (Shamnoy, 1999).

The European Enlightenment on the understanding of human rights seems to have towered over other regions’ understanding. Although human rights were a concept generally shared worldwide the struggle for the rights began in the western world. The Britain witnessed several revolutions that resulted in the enactment of laws that upheld human rights and these included rights of women to vote, right of workers among others.

America in turn used the similar discourse in its country to fight for independence to fight against racial discrimination. Such struggles spread all over the world and later led to nations agreeing on the need for a common understanding of human rights through a universal body- the UN.

Capitalism that developed in Europe also created a foundation for the development of the human rights Universal language because it led to the empowerment of the private sector and restriction of government powers (Ishay, 2003).

The origin of the human rights construct is a politically charged debate because it brings into picture the struggle for global dominance between nations. There is a largely believed notion that the understanding of human rights originated from the western world. On the contrary, a lot of evidences have been brought forward that suggest that human rights concept has a worldwide origin.

The evidences point out that human rights existed in different societies all over the world long before the western influence reached those societies.

They also explain that the ancient religions and traditions of those societies had practices that included the respect for human rights. In addition, ancient philosophers in those ancient societies have also demonstrated that they actually understood what human rights are as conceived today.

They went ahead and called for the abolishment of rules and beliefs that violated the concepts of equality, justice and respect for life. However, the ancient understanding is to some extend questioned because as much as they valued life some practices were out rightly against human rights, yet were embraced as acceptable practices such as regarding women as inferior.

This supports the idea of European enlightenment. In spite of the western massive contribution to the struggle for human rights it is still clear that the idea did not only originate from them but was a worldwide practice even in ancient times.

Ishay, M. (2004). ‘What Are Human Rights? Six Historical Controversies,’ Journal of Human Rights 3 (3): 359-371.

Ishay, M. R. (2003). The history of human rights: from ancient times to the globalization era. Berkeley, University of California Press, pp. 173-243.

Lauren, P. G. (2003). The evolution of international human rights: visions seen . Chap: “My brother’s and sister’s keeper: visions and the birth of human rights.” 2nd Ed, Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press.

Samnøy, Å. (1999). ‘The Origins of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,’ The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: A Common Standard of Achievement. pp. 3-22.

United Nations (1948). The Universal Declaration Of Human Rights, On-Line At: Http://Www.Un.Org/En/Documents/Udhr/Index.Shtml United Nations (UN) 1996/2011. What Are Human Rights? On-Line At: Http://Www.Ohchr.Org/EN/Issues/Pages/WhatareHumanRights.Aspx

United Nations, Office Of The High Commissioner For Human Rights (OHCHR). (2008). Working With The United Nations Human Rights Programme: A Handbook For Civil Society. New York And Geneva: OHCHR, On-Line At: Http://Www.Ohchr.Org/EN/AboutUs/CivilSociety/Documents/Handbook_en.Pdf [Selections: Pp. 1-13; 31-45; 75-89]

Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, December 14). The Origin of the Human Rights Concept. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-origin-of-the-human-rights-concept-essay/

"The Origin of the Human Rights Concept." IvyPanda , 14 Dec. 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/the-origin-of-the-human-rights-concept-essay/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'The Origin of the Human Rights Concept'. 14 December.

IvyPanda . 2019. "The Origin of the Human Rights Concept." December 14, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-origin-of-the-human-rights-concept-essay/.

1. IvyPanda . "The Origin of the Human Rights Concept." December 14, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-origin-of-the-human-rights-concept-essay/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The Origin of the Human Rights Concept." December 14, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-origin-of-the-human-rights-concept-essay/.

Where Creativity and Inspiration Originate
Global Market: Where Does Your Meal Originate?
The Poem "Still, I Rise" by Maya Angelou
Hindu Pathways and Buddhist Noble Truths
The UN Declaration of Human Rights & The UN Millennium Project
Critique of the U.S & the U.N Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Animal Ethics From the Buddhist Perspective
Hindu Ethics: Definition and Traditional Understanding
The Aspects of Food in the Hindu Religion
Buddhist Meditation’s Impact on Health
Gun politics in the United States
Demonstrations and Protests
What Are Human Rights?
Media Ethics and Law – Free Expression
Immigrants and Human Rights

Search Menu
Browse content in Arts and Humanities
Browse content in Archaeology
Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
Archaeology by Region
Archaeology of Religion
Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
Biblical Archaeology
Contemporary and Public Archaeology
Environmental Archaeology
Historical Archaeology
History and Theory of Archaeology
Industrial Archaeology
Landscape Archaeology
Mortuary Archaeology
Prehistoric Archaeology
Underwater Archaeology
Urban Archaeology
Zooarchaeology
Browse content in Architecture
Architectural Structure and Design
History of Architecture
Residential and Domestic Buildings
Theory of Architecture
Browse content in Art
Art Subjects and Themes
History of Art
Industrial and Commercial Art
Theory of Art
Biographical Studies
Byzantine Studies
Browse content in Classical Studies
Classical Literature
Classical Reception
Classical History
Classical Philosophy
Classical Mythology
Classical Art and Architecture
Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
Greek and Roman Archaeology
Greek and Roman Papyrology
Greek and Roman Epigraphy
Greek and Roman Law
Late Antiquity
Religion in the Ancient World
Digital Humanities
Browse content in History
Colonialism and Imperialism
Diplomatic History
Environmental History
Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
Historical Geography
History by Period
History of Agriculture
History of Education
History of Emotions
History of Gender and Sexuality
Industrial History
Intellectual History
International History
Labour History
Legal and Constitutional History
Local and Family History
Maritime History
Military History
National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
Oral History
Political History
Public History
Regional and National History
Revolutions and Rebellions
Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
Social and Cultural History
Theory, Methods, and Historiography
Urban History
World History
Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
Language Learning (Specific Skills)
Language Teaching Theory and Methods
Browse content in Linguistics
Applied Linguistics
Cognitive Linguistics
Computational Linguistics
Forensic Linguistics
Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
History of English
Language Variation
Language Families
Language Evolution
Language Reference
Language Acquisition
Lexicography
Linguistic Theories
Linguistic Typology
Linguistic Anthropology
Phonetics and Phonology
Psycholinguistics
Sociolinguistics
Translation and Interpretation
Writing Systems
Browse content in Literature
Bibliography
Children's Literature Studies
Literary Studies (Modernism)
Literary Studies (Romanticism)
Literary Studies (American)
Literary Studies (Asian)
Literary Studies (European)
Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
Literary Studies - World
Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
Literary Studies (19th Century)
Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
Literary Studies (African American Literature)
Literary Studies (British and Irish)
Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
Literary Studies (History of the Book)
Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
Literary Studies (War Literature)
Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
Mythology and Folklore
Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
Browse content in Media Studies
Browse content in Music
Applied Music
Dance and Music
Ethics in Music
Ethnomusicology
Gender and Sexuality in Music
Medicine and Music
Music Cultures
Music and Culture
Music and Media
Music and Religion
Music Education and Pedagogy
Music Theory and Analysis
Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
Musicology and Music History
Performance Practice and Studies
Race and Ethnicity in Music
Sound Studies
Browse content in Performing Arts
Browse content in Philosophy
Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
Epistemology
Feminist Philosophy
History of Western Philosophy
Metaphysics
Moral Philosophy
Non-Western Philosophy
Philosophy of Action
Philosophy of Law
Philosophy of Religion
Philosophy of Language
Philosophy of Mind
Philosophy of Perception
Philosophy of Science
Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
Practical Ethics
Social and Political Philosophy
Browse content in Religion
Biblical Studies
Christianity
East Asian Religions
History of Religion
Judaism and Jewish Studies
Qumran Studies
Religion and Education
Religion and Health
Religion and Politics
Religion and Science
Religion and Law
Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
Religious Studies
Browse content in Society and Culture
Cookery, Food, and Drink
Cultural Studies
Customs and Traditions
Ethical Issues and Debates
Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
Sports and Outdoor Recreation
Technology and Society
Travel and Holiday
Visual Culture
Browse content in Law
Arbitration
Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
Commercial Law
Company Law
Browse content in Comparative Law
Systems of Law
Competition Law
Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
Government Powers
Judicial Review
Local Government Law
Military and Defence Law
Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
Construction Law
Contract Law
Browse content in Criminal Law
Criminal Procedure
Criminal Evidence Law
Sentencing and Punishment
Employment and Labour Law
Environment and Energy Law
Browse content in Financial Law
Banking Law
Insolvency Law
History of Law
Human Rights and Immigration
Intellectual Property Law
Browse content in International Law
Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
Public International Law
IT and Communications Law
Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
Law and Society
Law and Politics
Browse content in Legal System and Practice
Courts and Procedure
Legal Skills and Practice
Primary Sources of Law
Regulation of Legal Profession
Medical and Healthcare Law
Browse content in Policing
Criminal Investigation and Detection
Police and Security Services
Police Procedure and Law
Police Regional Planning
Browse content in Property Law
Personal Property Law
Study and Revision
Terrorism and National Security Law
Browse content in Trusts Law
Wills and Probate or Succession
Browse content in Medicine and Health
Browse content in Allied Health Professions
Arts Therapies
Clinical Science
Dietetics and Nutrition
Occupational Therapy
Operating Department Practice
Physiotherapy
Radiography
Speech and Language Therapy
Browse content in Anaesthetics
General Anaesthesia
Neuroanaesthesia
Clinical Neuroscience
Browse content in Clinical Medicine
Acute Medicine
Cardiovascular Medicine
Clinical Genetics
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Dermatology
Endocrinology and Diabetes
Gastroenterology
Genito-urinary Medicine
Geriatric Medicine
Infectious Diseases
Medical Oncology
Medical Toxicology
Pain Medicine
Palliative Medicine
Rehabilitation Medicine
Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
Rheumatology
Sleep Medicine
Sports and Exercise Medicine
Community Medical Services
Critical Care
Emergency Medicine
Forensic Medicine
Haematology
History of Medicine
Medical Ethics
Browse content in Medical Skills
Clinical Skills
Communication Skills
Nursing Skills
Surgical Skills
Browse content in Medical Dentistry
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Paediatric Dentistry
Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
Surgical Dentistry
Medical Statistics and Methodology
Browse content in Neurology
Clinical Neurophysiology
Neuropathology
Nursing Studies
Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Gynaecology
Occupational Medicine
Ophthalmology
Otolaryngology (ENT)
Browse content in Paediatrics
Neonatology
Browse content in Pathology
Chemical Pathology
Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
Histopathology
Medical Microbiology and Virology
Patient Education and Information
Browse content in Pharmacology
Psychopharmacology
Browse content in Popular Health
Caring for Others
Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Self-help and Personal Development
Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
Cell Biology
Molecular Biology and Genetics
Reproduction, Growth and Development
Primary Care
Professional Development in Medicine
Browse content in Psychiatry
Addiction Medicine
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
Forensic Psychiatry
Learning Disabilities
Old Age Psychiatry
Psychotherapy
Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
Epidemiology
Public Health
Browse content in Radiology
Clinical Radiology
Interventional Radiology
Nuclear Medicine
Radiation Oncology
Reproductive Medicine
Browse content in Surgery
Cardiothoracic Surgery
Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
General Surgery
Neurosurgery
Paediatric Surgery
Peri-operative Care
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Surgical Oncology
Transplant Surgery
Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
Vascular Surgery
Browse content in Science and Mathematics
Browse content in Biological Sciences
Aquatic Biology
Biochemistry
Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
Developmental Biology
Ecology and Conservation
Evolutionary Biology
Genetics and Genomics
Microbiology
Molecular and Cell Biology
Natural History
Plant Sciences and Forestry
Research Methods in Life Sciences
Structural Biology
Systems Biology
Zoology and Animal Sciences
Browse content in Chemistry
Analytical Chemistry
Computational Chemistry
Crystallography
Environmental Chemistry
Industrial Chemistry
Inorganic Chemistry
Materials Chemistry
Medicinal Chemistry
Mineralogy and Gems
Organic Chemistry
Physical Chemistry
Polymer Chemistry
Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
Theoretical Chemistry
Browse content in Computer Science
Artificial Intelligence
Computer Architecture and Logic Design
Game Studies
Human-Computer Interaction
Mathematical Theory of Computation
Programming Languages
Software Engineering
Systems Analysis and Design
Virtual Reality
Browse content in Computing
Business Applications
Computer Games
Computer Security
Computer Networking and Communications
Digital Lifestyle
Graphical and Digital Media Applications
Operating Systems
Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
Atmospheric Sciences
Environmental Geography
Geology and the Lithosphere
Maps and Map-making
Meteorology and Climatology
Oceanography and Hydrology
Palaeontology
Physical Geography and Topography
Regional Geography
Soil Science
Urban Geography
Browse content in Engineering and Technology
Agriculture and Farming
Biological Engineering
Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
Electronics and Communications Engineering
Energy Technology
Engineering (General)
Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
History of Engineering and Technology
Mechanical Engineering and Materials
Technology of Industrial Chemistry
Transport Technology and Trades
Browse content in Environmental Science
Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
Environmental Sustainability
Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
History of Science and Technology
Browse content in Materials Science
Ceramics and Glasses
Composite Materials
Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
Nanotechnology
Browse content in Mathematics
Applied Mathematics
Biomathematics and Statistics
History of Mathematics
Mathematical Education
Mathematical Finance
Mathematical Analysis
Numerical and Computational Mathematics
Probability and Statistics
Pure Mathematics
Browse content in Neuroscience
Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
Development of the Nervous System
Disorders of the Nervous System
History of Neuroscience
Invertebrate Neurobiology
Molecular and Cellular Systems
Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
Neuroscientific Techniques
Sensory and Motor Systems
Browse content in Physics
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
Biological and Medical Physics
Classical Mechanics
Computational Physics
Condensed Matter Physics
Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
History of Physics
Mathematical and Statistical Physics
Measurement Science
Nuclear Physics
Particles and Fields
Plasma Physics
Quantum Physics
Relativity and Gravitation
Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
Browse content in Psychology
Affective Sciences
Clinical Psychology
Cognitive Neuroscience
Cognitive Psychology
Criminal and Forensic Psychology
Developmental Psychology
Educational Psychology
Evolutionary Psychology
Health Psychology
History and Systems in Psychology
Music Psychology
Neuropsychology
Organizational Psychology
Psychological Assessment and Testing
Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
Psychology Professional Development and Training
Research Methods in Psychology
Social Psychology
Browse content in Social Sciences
Browse content in Anthropology
Anthropology of Religion
Human Evolution
Medical Anthropology
Physical Anthropology
Regional Anthropology
Social and Cultural Anthropology
Theory and Practice of Anthropology
Browse content in Business and Management
Business History
Business Ethics
Business Strategy
Business and Technology
Business and Government
Business and the Environment
Comparative Management
Corporate Governance
Corporate Social Responsibility
Entrepreneurship
Health Management
Human Resource Management
Industrial and Employment Relations
Industry Studies
Information and Communication Technologies
International Business
Knowledge Management
Management and Management Techniques
Operations Management
Organizational Theory and Behaviour
Pensions and Pension Management
Public and Nonprofit Management
Strategic Management
Supply Chain Management
Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
Criminal Justice
Criminology
Forms of Crime
International and Comparative Criminology
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
Development Studies
Browse content in Economics
Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
Asian Economics
Behavioural Finance
Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
Economic Methodology
Economic History
Economic Systems
Economic Development and Growth
Financial Markets
Financial Institutions and Services
General Economics and Teaching
Health, Education, and Welfare
History of Economic Thought
International Economics
Labour and Demographic Economics
Law and Economics
Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
Microeconomics
Public Economics
Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
Welfare Economics
Browse content in Education
Adult Education and Continuous Learning
Care and Counselling of Students
Early Childhood and Elementary Education
Educational Equipment and Technology
Educational Strategies and Policy
Higher and Further Education
Organization and Management of Education
Philosophy and Theory of Education
Schools Studies
Secondary Education
Teaching of a Specific Subject
Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
Teaching Skills and Techniques
Browse content in Environment
Applied Ecology (Social Science)
Climate Change
Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
Natural Disasters (Environment)
Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
Browse content in Human Geography
Cultural Geography
Economic Geography
Political Geography
Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
Communication Studies
Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
Browse content in Politics
African Politics
Asian Politics
Chinese Politics
Comparative Politics
Conflict Politics
Elections and Electoral Studies
Environmental Politics
European Union
Foreign Policy
Gender and Politics
Human Rights and Politics
Indian Politics
International Relations
International Organization (Politics)
International Political Economy
Irish Politics
Latin American Politics
Middle Eastern Politics
Political Theory
Political Behaviour
Political Economy
Political Institutions
Political Methodology
Political Communication
Political Philosophy
Political Sociology
Politics and Law
Public Policy
Public Administration
Quantitative Political Methodology
Regional Political Studies
Russian Politics
Security Studies
State and Local Government
UK Politics
US Politics
Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
African Studies
Asian Studies
East Asian Studies
Japanese Studies
Latin American Studies
Middle Eastern Studies
Native American Studies
Scottish Studies
Browse content in Research and Information
Research Methods
Browse content in Social Work
Addictions and Substance Misuse
Adoption and Fostering
Care of the Elderly
Child and Adolescent Social Work
Couple and Family Social Work
Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
Emergency Services
Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
International and Global Issues in Social Work
Mental and Behavioural Health
Social Justice and Human Rights
Social Policy and Advocacy
Social Work and Crime and Justice
Social Work Macro Practice
Social Work Practice Settings
Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
Welfare and Benefit Systems
Browse content in Sociology
Childhood Studies
Community Development
Comparative and Historical Sociology
Economic Sociology
Gender and Sexuality
Gerontology and Ageing
Health, Illness, and Medicine
Marriage and the Family
Migration Studies
Occupations, Professions, and Work
Organizations
Population and Demography
Race and Ethnicity
Social Theory
Social Movements and Social Change
Social Research and Statistics
Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
Sociology of Religion
Sociology of Education
Sport and Leisure
Urban and Rural Studies
Browse content in Warfare and Defence
Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
Land Forces and Warfare
Military Administration
Military Life and Institutions
Naval Forces and Warfare
Other Warfare and Defence Issues
Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
Weapons and Equipment

Human Rights and Common Good: Collected Essays Volume III

< Previous
Next chapter >

Introduction

Author Webpage

Published: April 2011
Cite Icon Cite
Permissions Icon Permissions

This introductory chapter aims to vindicate the idea of human rights (properly understood in their logical complexity) against scepticism which puts in doubt, or treats as ungrounded, the idea that rights can and should be predicated of human persons just as such. The vindication involves articulating and illustrating the reality of the spiritual as an intrinsic aspect of each human being's unitary reality or nature. This in turn requires articulation of the idea of radical capacities, and at least suggests the relevance of the universe's being providentially ordered. A change of mind in relation to Aquinas and paternalism is pointed out. The main arguments in the volume's remaining parts are surveyed with brief commentary, explanation, contextualizing, and some updating.

Signed in as

Institutional accounts.

Google Scholar Indexing
GoogleCrawler [DO NOT DELETE]

Personal account

Sign in with email/username & password
Get email alerts
Save searches
Purchase content
Activate your purchase/trial code

Institutional access

Sign in with a library card Sign in with username/password Recommend to your librarian
Institutional account management
Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Sign in through your institution

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institutionâ€™s website and Oxford Academic.

Click Sign in through your institution.
Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institutionâ€™s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Sign in with a library card

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see â€˜Sign in through society siteâ€™ in the sign in pane within a journal:

Click Sign in through society site.
When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

About Oxford Academic
Publish journals with us
University press partners
What we publish
New features
Open access
Rights and permissions
Accessibility
Advertising
Media enquiries
Oxford University Press
Oxford Languages
University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

Cookie settings
Cookie policy
Privacy policy
Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Human Rights Essay, with Outline

Published by gudwriter on January 4, 2021 January 4, 2021

Human rights essay can be a little tricky for students that’s why you need the best MBA essay writers to help you with your essay assignment.

Elevate Your Writing with Our Free Writing Tools!

Did you know that we provide a free essay and speech generator, plagiarism checker, summarizer, paraphraser, and other writing tools for free?

Human Rights Sample Essay Outline

Introduction.

Thesis: Human rights guarantee equal treatment of all people irrespective of their color, gender, religion or nationality.

Paragraph 1:

Every human being is entitled to all human rights upon their conception.

All persons are entitled to their human rights without discrimination.
Universal human rights under the international law dictate the responsibilities of state governments and list the practices that they should cease from to promote rights and freedoms of their people.
Human rights are unchallengeable.
Human rights violation such as human trafficking are severely punished.

Paragraph 2:

In the U.S., the Constitution protects human rights through the 9th Amendment.

The amendment states that “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
The “certain rights” here are those that are taken care of or protected through other amendments in the Bill of Rights.

Paragraph 3:

Human rights are symbiotic and inseparable.

Human rights are interdependent.
Improvement of one human right translates to development of all, and deprivation one is a deprivation of all.

Paragraph 4:

Human rights facilitate peaceful living for all individuals.

Human rights are not for the oppressed but all individuals.
Human rights protect individuals in their day to day activities.
Freedom of expression gives ordinary people the power to condemn acts of the powerful as well as oppose abuse of power by state governments.

Paragraph 5:

Human rights came to be universally accepted after World War II.

Sources of human rights include Magna Carta 1215 , the United States Constitution and bill of rights in 1791, and the French declaration of human rights in 1789.
United Nations played a significant role in the establishment of the international laws, which enforce human rights.

Paragraph 6:

The League of Nations first raised concern over abuse of human rights after the First World War.

The push for human rights bore fruits after the World War II when the Nazis killed more than 6million Jews, disabled people, and homosexuals.
State governments formed the United Nations to help prevent interstate conflicts and promote peace.

Paragraph 7:

In 1941, President Franklin Delano in his speech to the United Nations Congress mentioned the need for established of four central freedoms, which were freedom of religion, expression, and freedom from fear and want.

In 1945 the United Nations Charter was drafted.
A commission on human rights was formed to come up with a document containing a declaration of all human rights.
A restatement of the thesis statement
A summary of the main points
A take-away statement made based on presented facts or information

Human rights essay – informative essay about human rights, history, what it is, etc.

A Sample Essay on Human Rights

The world is made up of people with different characters. People are divided into the three social classes: the rich, the middle class, and the poor. There are people who hold positions of power and leadership while others are ruled or governed. In spite of these differences, all human beings are equal and should be treated equally. However, there some people, particularly those in positions of power, who may use their influence to mistreat others. Human rights exist to prevent those in power and ordinary people from abusing others. In this regard, human rights guarantee equal treatment of all people irrespective of their color, gender, religion, or nationality.

Every human being regardless of their gender, color, nationality, and religion are born with their rights. All persons are entitled to their human rights without discrimination (Hoffman, 2016). Laws and treaties enforce human rights, and the universal law on human rights ensures that no person or government abuses the rights of another human being (Hoffman, 2016). Universal human rights under the international law dictate the responsibilities of governments and list the practices that they should cease from in order to promote the rights and freedoms of their people. The international law provides that human rights are collective and unchallengeable (Hoffman, 2016). All countries from around the world have approved at least one or more of the four universal treaties of human rights.

In the United States for example, the Constitution protects human rights through the 9th Amendment. This amendment states that “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people” (Schmitt, 2010). The “certain rights” here are those that are taken care of or protected through other amendments in the Bill of Rights. However, there are also “others retained by the people,” and they include all other human rights that should be naturally enjoyed by a free people. A good example of these other rights are “the “unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” identified by the Declaration of Independence” (Schmitt, 2010). They additionally include such natural rights as the right to defense of family and self, property, privacy, thought, communication, work, travel, education, and free association. In other terms, they are intensive rights that all human beings should inherently enjoy.

Human rights are symbiotic and inseparable. According to the international law, all human rights are dependent on each other. No person should be deprived of their social, civil, political, or economic rights. The right to life, right to equality, right to work, freedom of expression, and other rights are inseparable. Improvement of one of these rights translates to the development of all, and deprivation of one culminates in deprivation of all (Carrim, 2007). The fundamental purpose of this interrelation among all human rights is to ensure they are one so that governments or individuals will not improve some rights while depriving others. Thus, an abuse of a single human freedom is an abuse of all human rights.

Further, human rights facilitate peaceful living for all human beings. Most people believe that human rights are meant to emancipate the oppressed from oppression, but in the real sense, they apply to everyone (Hoffman, 2016). The rights protect individuals in their day to day activities. Without them, it would be impossible to express oneself, but due to the freedom of expression, everyone can speak up their minds (Hoffman, 2016). Freedom of speech gives ordinary people the power to condemn acts of the powerful as well as oppose abuse of power by state governments (Hoffman, 2016). In this regard, human rights empower ordinary people to the point that they can negotiate with those in power. It is through these rights that people have access to education, family life, and private life.

Noteworthy, human rights came to be universally accepted after the Second World War (Swimelar, 2009). Before then, people had no rights, and they got their freedoms from joining a family, religious organizations, and national groups. There are several materials that serve as the source of human rights and they include Magna Carta 1215, the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights of 1791, and the French declaration of human rights of 1789 (McFarland, 2017). The formation of the United Nations played a significant role in the establishment of the international laws which enforce human rights. Slavery also contributed to the formulation of some human rights. In the year 1919, in efforts to put a stop to slavery, countries formed the International Labor Organization, which was meant to protect workers from harassment and guarantee their safety.

The League of Nations first raised concern over the abuse of human rights after the First World War. The countries involved were concerned about the sufferings that some minority groups had been subjected to. However, the efforts of the countries bore no fruits because the United States failed to join. The push for human rights arose again after the Second World War when the Nazis killed more than 6million Jews, disabled people, and gays (McFarland, 2017). The whole world was horrified by such high levels of cruelty. Some leaders from the defeated nations were tried in Tokyo and Nurnberg for committing crimes against humanity (McFarland, 2017). Governments across the world then decided to form the United Nations (UN), which would help prevent interstate conflicts and promote peace.

In 1941, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in his speech to the United Nations Congress mentioned the need for the establishment of four central freedoms, which were freedom of religion, freedom of expression, freedom from fear, and freedom from want (McFarland, 2017). Other countries called for the declaration of standard human rights to protect ordinary people living within the borders of their nations from war. Due to these calls, the United Nations Charter was drafted in the year 1945 (McFarland, 2017). Members of the organization affirmed their commitment towards promoting reverence for human rights for all people. In efforts to support this move, the UN formed a commission on human rights, which was then given the responsibility to come up with a document listing all the reasons discussed in the 1945 Charter.

Human rights came into existence to protect the weak and oppressed from mistreatment by those in power. Human rights assure all people of fair treatment as all individuals are equal irrespective of their color, sex, religion, or social class. The Second World War marked the peak for the push for human rights. The act of Nazis of killing more than 6million innocent people made the world see the need for the official declaration of human rights. It was among the major events that made the world realize the need for universal human rights, which are today enjoyed by billions of people across the world.

Carrim, N. H. (2007). Human rights and the construction of identities in South African education (Doctoral dissertation).

Hoffmann, S. L. (2016). Human rights and history. Past & Present , 232 (1), 279-310.

McFarland, S. (2017). The universal declaration of human rights: a tribute to its architects. Public Integrity , 19 (2), 108-122.

Schmitt, H. H. (2010). “Natural rights and the 9th amendment”. America’s Uncommon Sense . Retrieved May 12, 2020 from https://www.americasuncommonsense.com/2010/09/natural-rights-and-the-9th-amendment/

Swimelar, S. (2009). International human rights: a comprehensive introduction. Human Rights Quarterly , 31 (3), 821-826.

Special offer! Get 20% discount on your first order. Promo code: SAVE20

Free essays and research papers, artificial intelligence argumentative essay – with outline.

Artificial Intelligence Argumentative Essay Outline In recent years, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become one of the rapidly developing fields and as its capabilities continue to expand, its potential impact on society has become a topic Read more…

Synthesis Essay Example – With Outline

The goal of a synthesis paper is to show that you can handle in-depth research, dissect complex ideas, and present the arguments. Most college or university students have a hard time writing a synthesis essay, Read more…

Examples of Spatial Order – With Outline

A spatial order is an organizational style that helps in the presentation of ideas or things as is in their locations. Most students struggle to understand the meaning of spatial order in writing and have Read more…

AI Index Report

Welcome to the seventh edition of the AI Index report. The 2024 Index is our most comprehensive to date and arrives at an important moment when AI’s influence on society has never been more pronounced. This year, we have broadened our scope to more extensively cover essential trends such as technical advancements in AI, public perceptions of the technology, and the geopolitical dynamics surrounding its development. Featuring more original data than ever before, this edition introduces new estimates on AI training costs, detailed analyses of the responsible AI landscape, and an entirely new chapter dedicated to AI’s impact on science and medicine.

Read the 2024 AI Index Report

The AI Index report tracks, collates, distills, and visualizes data related to artificial intelligence (AI). Our mission is to provide unbiased, rigorously vetted, broadly sourced data in order for policymakers, researchers, executives, journalists, and the general public to develop a more thorough and nuanced understanding of the complex field of AI.

The AI Index is recognized globally as one of the most credible and authoritative sources for data and insights on artificial intelligence. Previous editions have been cited in major newspapers, including the The New York Times, Bloomberg, and The Guardian, have amassed hundreds of academic citations, and been referenced by high-level policymakers in the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union, among other places. This year’s edition surpasses all previous ones in size, scale, and scope, reflecting the growing significance that AI is coming to hold in all of our lives.

Steering Committee Co-Directors

Ray Perrault

Steering committee members.

Erik Brynjolfsson

John Etchemendy

Katrina Ligett

Terah Lyons

James Manyika

Juan Carlos Niebles

Vanessa Parli

Yoav Shoham

Russell Wald

Staff members.

Loredana Fattorini

Nestor Maslej

Letter from the co-directors.

A decade ago, the best AI systems in the world were unable to classify objects in images at a human level. AI struggled with language comprehension and could not solve math problems. Today, AI systems routinely exceed human performance on standard benchmarks.

Progress accelerated in 2023. New state-of-the-art systems like GPT-4, Gemini, and Claude 3 are impressively multimodal: They can generate fluent text in dozens of languages, process audio, and even explain memes. As AI has improved, it has increasingly forced its way into our lives. Companies are racing to build AI-based products, and AI is increasingly being used by the general public. But current AI technology still has significant problems. It cannot reliably deal with facts, perform complex reasoning, or explain its conclusions.

AI faces two interrelated futures. First, technology continues to improve and is increasingly used, having major consequences for productivity and employment. It can be put to both good and bad uses. In the second future, the adoption of AI is constrained by the limitations of the technology. Regardless of which future unfolds, governments are increasingly concerned. They are stepping in to encourage the upside, such as funding university R&D and incentivizing private investment. Governments are also aiming to manage the potential downsides, such as impacts on employment, privacy concerns, misinformation, and intellectual property rights.

As AI rapidly evolves, the AI Index aims to help the AI community, policymakers, business leaders, journalists, and the general public navigate this complex landscape. It provides ongoing, objective snapshots tracking several key areas: technical progress in AI capabilities, the community and investments driving AI development and deployment, public opinion on current and potential future impacts, and policy measures taken to stimulate AI innovation while managing its risks and challenges. By comprehensively monitoring the AI ecosystem, the Index serves as an important resource for understanding this transformative technological force.

On the technical front, this year’s AI Index reports that the number of new large language models released worldwide in 2023 doubled over the previous year. Two-thirds were open-source, but the highest-performing models came from industry players with closed systems. Gemini Ultra became the first LLM to reach human-level performance on the Massive Multitask Language Understanding (MMLU) benchmark; performance on the benchmark has improved by 15 percentage points since last year. Additionally, GPT-4 achieved an impressive 0.97 mean win rate score on the comprehensive Holistic Evaluation of Language Models (HELM) benchmark, which includes MMLU among other evaluations.

Although global private investment in AI decreased for the second consecutive year, investment in generative AI skyrocketed. More Fortune 500 earnings calls mentioned AI than ever before, and new studies show that AI tangibly boosts worker productivity. On the policymaking front, global mentions of AI in legislative proceedings have never been higher. U.S. regulators passed more AI-related regulations in 2023 than ever before. Still, many expressed concerns about AI’s ability to generate deepfakes and impact elections. The public became more aware of AI, and studies suggest that they responded with nervousness.

Ray Perrault Co-director, AI Index

Our Supporting Partners

Analytics & Research Partners

Stay up to date on the AI Index by subscribing to the Stanford HAI newsletter.

Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs

How Big Tech and Silicon Valley are Transforming the Military-Industrial Complex

America’s military-industrial complex has been rapidly expanding from the Capital Beltway to Silicon Valley. Although much of the Pentagon’s budget is spent on conventional weapons systems, the Defense Department has increasingly sought to adopt AI-enabled systems. Big tech companies, venture capital, and private equity firms benefit from multi-billion dollar Defense contracts, and smaller defense tech startups that “move fast and break things” also receive increased Defense funding. This report illustrates how a growing portion of the Defense Department’s spending is going to large, well-known tech firms, including some of the most highly valued corporations in the world.

Given the often-classified nature of large defense and intelligence contracts, a lack of transparency makes it difficult to discern the true amount of U.S. spending diverted to Big Tech. Yet, research reveals that the amount is substantial, and growing. According to the nonprofit research organization Tech Inquiry , three of the world’s biggest tech corporations were awarded approximately $28 billion from 2018 to 2022, including Microsoft ($13.5 billion), Amazon ($10.2 billion), and Alphabet, which is Google’s parent company ($4.3 billion). This paper found that the top five contracts to major tech firms between 2019 and 2022 had contract ceilings totaling at least $53 billion combined.

From 2021 through 2023, venture capital firms reportedly pumped nearly $100 billion into defense tech startup companies — an amount 40 percent higher than the previous seven years combined. This report examines how Silicon Valley startups, big tech, and venture capital who benefit from classified Defense contracts will create costly, high-tech defense products that are ineffective, unpredictable, and unsafe – all on the American taxpayer’s dime.

READ FULL PAPER >

Executive Summary >

IMAGES

Human Rights Essay
Human Rights Essay
Sample essay on international human rights law
Essay on Human Rights/Essay on human rights in english/Human rights
Human Rights Essay
Rights and Responsibilities Free Essay Example

VIDEO

10 lines essay on human rights day in English| Human rights day essay| Human rights| #humanrights
English Essay about Human Rights| Essay on Human Rights
Human Rights and Environmental Due Diligence (HREDD)
Essay on Human Rights || Human rights essay in english || essay on Human rights day
10 Lines Essay On Human Rights In English
10 Lines on Human Rights in English| Essay on Human Rights| Human Rights Essay|

COMMENTS

PDF Human Rights: A Brief Introduction
the concept of human rights, this essay will examine the tensions between human rights and state sovereignty, the challenges to the universality of human rights, the enumeration of rights recognized by the international community, and the means available to translate the high aspirations of human rights into practice. II.
Essay on Human Rights: Samples in 500 and 1500
Here is a 200-word short sample essay on basic Human Rights. Human rights are a set of rights given to every human being regardless of their gender, caste, creed, religion, nation, location or economic status. These are said to be moral principles that illustrate certain standards of human behaviour.
Human rights
human rights, rights that belong to an individual or group of individuals simply for being human, or as a consequence of inherent human vulnerability, or because they are requisite to the possibility of a just society. Whatever their theoretical justification, human rights refer to a wide continuum of values or capabilities thought to enhance human agency or protect human interests and ...
10 Tips for Writing a Human Rights Essay
To excel at writing human rights essays, follow these 10 tips: 1. Choose a topic you are passionate about. First and foremost, you need to find a topic you are truly passionate about. Human rights are such a broad field of study and can be linked to nearly any other subject - from history and anthropology to technology and medicine.
What are human rights?
Article 1 of the UDHR states: "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.". Freedom from discrimination, set out in Article 2, is what ensures this equality. Non-discrimination cuts across all international human rights law. This principle is present in all major human rights treaties. It also provides the central theme ...
Human Rights: A Brief Introduction
Human Rights: A Brief Introduction . View/ Open. Human Rights-A Brief Introduction, 2014 ed.pdf (495.6Kb) Author. Marks, Stephen P. 0000-0003-0978-5150. Metadata Show full item record ... and advocacy discourse and some historical background of the concept of human rights, this essay will examine the tensions between human rights and state ...
The complex origins, development, and meanings of human rights
This essay is an excerpt from A World Divided: The Global Struggle for Human Rights in the Age of Nation-States by Eric D. Weitz.. About the Author. Eric D. Weitz (1953-2021) was Distinguished Professor of History at City College and the Graduate Center, City University of New York.He was also the author of Weimar Germany: Promise and Tragedy, which was named a New York Times Book Review ...
Human Rights: A Brief Introduction
Human Rights: A Brief Introduction. Working Paper, Harvard School of Public Health. Human rights constitute a set of norms governing the treatment of individuals and groups by states and non-state actors on the basis of ethical principles regarding what society considers fundamental to a decent life. These norms are incorporated into national ...
Inspiring human rights essays everybody should know
Through each of these specific areas, this report gives examples of the human rights framework in action through real-life cases. Part 1: So Software Has Eaten the World: What Does It Mean for Human Rights, Security and Governance; Part 2: Digital Disruption of Human Rights. This two-part article from Eileen Donahoe, Director of Global Affairs ...
Human Rights: A Very Short Introduction
Abstract. Human Rights: A Very Short Introduction considers the controversies surrounding the human rights movement by focusing on highly topical issues such as torture, arbitrary detention, privacy, equality, health, and discrimination. It discusses the historical origins of human rights and how they are formed in law; explains what our human rights actually are; and considers where the human ...
Human Rights
Human rights are norms that aspire to protect all people everywhere from severe political, legal, and social abuses. Examples of human rights are the right to freedom of religion, the right to a fair trial when charged with a crime, the right not to be tortured, and the right to education. The philosophy of human rights addresses questions ...
240 Human Rights Essay Topics & Samples
240 Human Rights Essay Topics & Examples. Updated: Feb 29th, 2024. 26 min. Whether you're interested in exploring enduring issues, social justice, or democracy, see the ideas below. Along with human rights topics for essays and other papers, our experts have prepared writing tips for you. We will write.
Introduction
One productive starting point is that, even as the relationship of human rights to social and political change is everywhere shifting and contested, human rights remain the closest thing to a global lingua franca for representing, framing, labelling, and demanding redress for injustice and social suffering. As Sally Merry writes in her posthumously published essay in this book, organizations ...
(PDF) Human Rights: A Brief Introduction
The economic, social and cultural rights reaffirmed in the International Bill of Human Rights include four workers' rights (the right to gain a living by work freely chosen and accepted; the right to just and favorable conditions of work; the right to form and join trade unions; and the right to strike).
Human Rights, An Introduction
Human rights are based on the principle of respect for the individual. Their fundamental assumption is that each person is a moral and rational being who deserves to be treated with dignity. They are called human rights because they are universal. Whereas nations or specialized groups enjoy specific rights that apply only to them, human rights ...
Human Rights Essay for Students and Children
500+ Words Essay on Human Rights. Human rights are a set of rights which every human is entitled to. Every human being is inherited with these rights no matter what caste, creed, gender, the economic status they belong to. Human rights are very important for making sure that all humans get treated equally. They are in fact essential for a good ...
An Introduction to Human Rights
Human rights can broadly be defined as a number of basic rights that people from around the world have agreed are essential. These include the right to life, the right to a fair trial, freedom from torture and other cruel and inhuman treatment, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the rights to health, education and an adequate standard ...
International Human Rights Law
In the past two decades, the International Human Rights Law (IHRL) has increased its emphasis on protecting all human rights for people to live a free, secure, and healthy life. We will write a custom essay on your topic. 809 writers online. Learn More. According to Rehman (2010), living a dignified life can only be achieved if all basic ...
The Origin of the Human Rights Concept
Introduction. The spirit of human rights has been passed from generation to generation to generation either consciously or unconsciously. If today a person invokes the UN universal human rights declaration that was adopted in 1948 someone may think that this is an idea that has a universal agreement (United Nations, 1948).
Introduction
This introductory chapter aims to vindicate the idea of human rights (properly understood in their logical complexity) against scepticism which puts i ... Human Rights and Common Good: Collected Essays Volume III John Finnis. Contents Contents Search in this book ... John, 'Introduction', Human Rights and Common Good: Collected Essays Volume ...
Human Rights Essays
Last modified: 6th Aug 2021. This essay seeks to discuss this question with reference to the performance of the United Nations in pursuit of this goal and will explore the origins of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the limitations and disadvantages of the Universal Periodic Review system, as well as cultural incompatibilities ...
Human Rights Essay Sample With An Outline- Well Explained
Human rights essay - informative essay about human rights, history, what it is, etc. A Sample Essay on Human Rights Introduction . The world is made up of people with different characters. People are divided into the three social classes: the rich, the middle class, and the poor. There are people who hold positions of power and leadership ...
AI Index Report
Mission. The AI Index report tracks, collates, distills, and visualizes data related to artificial intelligence (AI). Our mission is to provide unbiased, rigorously vetted, broadly sourced data in order for policymakers, researchers, executives, journalists, and the general public to develop a more thorough and nuanced understanding of the complex field of AI.
How Big Tech and Silicon Valley are Transforming the Military
The Costs of War Project is a team of 35 scholars, legal experts, human rights practitioners, and physicians, which began its work in 2011. We use research and a public website to facilitate debate about the costs of the post-9/11 wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Essay on Human Rights: Samples in 500 and 1500

This Blog Includes:

What are Human Rights

8 Universities with higher ROI than IITs and IIMs

Connect With Us

Need help with?

Country Preference

Which English test are you planning to take?

When are you planning to take the exam?

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

What is your budget to study abroad?

The complex origins, development, and meanings of human rights

About the Author

Human Rights: A Brief Introduction

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Inspiring human rights essays everybody should know

You may also like

Apply Now for the United Nations The Hague Immersion Programme

The UN Immersion Programme Is Open for Applications!

The UN Young Leaders Online Training Programme is Open for Applications!

Apply now: Essex Human Rights Summer School (Fully Online)

17 International Organizations Offering Early-Career Opportunities

Gender Rights Jobs: Our Short Guide

Free MOOC on Children’s Right to Education in Armed Conflict

9 Online Courses on Leading Diverse Teams

40 Top-Rated Social Issues Courses to Study in 2024

10 Courses to Prepare for Your Human Rights Job

Register now: Global Institute of Human Rights Certificate Program

NGO Jobs: Our Short Guide

Bibliography

Human Rights

1. The General Idea of Human Rights

2. The Existence and Grounds of Human Rights

3. Which Rights are Human Rights?

Other Internet Resources

Acknowledgments

Support SEP

Human Rights: A Brief Introduction

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS

Welcome to the Human Rights E-Course

Human Rights, An Introduction

International Sites

Human Rights Essay for Students and Children

Human Rights Categories

Importance of Human Rights

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Download the App

SCAM ALERT: We will never contact you requesting money. Learn more.

Where do human rights come from?

Who has a responsibility to protect human rights?

What do human rights cover?

The origins of human rights

The development of modern human rights

Can my human rights be taken away from me?

The Origin of the Human Rights Concept Essay

Introduction

Signed in as

Personal account

Institutional access

IP based access

Sign in through your institution

Sign in with a library card

Society Members

Sign in through society site

Sign in using a personal account

Viewing your signed in accounts

Signed in but can't access content

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Human Rights Essay, with Outline

Elevate Your Writing with Our Free Writing Tools!

Human Rights Sample Essay Outline

A Sample Essay on Human Rights

Related Posts

Synthesis Essay Example – With Outline

Examples of Spatial Order – With Outline

AI Index Report