{"id":5701,"date":"2018-02-20T23:50:30","date_gmt":"2018-02-20T23:50:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/essaysparlor.com\/philosophy-2103-philosophy-of-human-rights\/"},"modified":"2017-02-20T19:25:57","modified_gmt":"2017-02-20T19:25:57","slug":"philosophy-2103-philosophy-of-human-rights","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/philosophy-2103-philosophy-of-human-rights\/","title":{"rendered":"Philosophy 2103: Philosophy of Human Rights"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Philosophy 2103: Philosophy of Human Rights<\/p>\n<p>Format<\/p>\n<p>\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\tNo title page needed, just put the title of your paper, your name and student number on 1st page<br \/>\n\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\t5-8 pages (1,500-2,000 words), 12 point font, double-spaced<br \/>\n\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\tIn citing references, the MLA style is recommended, but you may use any accepted style \ufffd\ufffd\ufffd the important thing is to make the reference clear enough for the<\/p>\n<p>grader to locate the source<br \/>\n\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\tTo cite anything from class lectures, just put: Ferguson, title of lecture slides, and the number of the slide<br \/>\n\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\tAny Internet sources used must be cited, with complete address, as follows: <http:\/\/www.search.yahoo.com\/....\n\nList of Possible Topics\n\n1.\tFree Speech: Recently the Supreme Court of Canada rendered its decision in the case of Whatcott v. the Human Rights Commission of Saskatchewan. The Government\n\nof Saskatchewan had charged William Whatcott with a hate crime for distributing anti-gay literature. The SCC found in favour of the HR Commission, declaring that\n\nspeech qualifies as hate speech, and, as such, can be prohibited \"If a reasonable person, aware of the context and circumstances, would view the expression as likely\n\nto expose a person or persons to detestation and vilification.\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\n\nThe SCC\ufffd\ufffd\ufffds ruling in this case is one of the most controversial in recent times. Briefly, but clearly, explain the Whatcott case and the ruling by the SSC, and then\n\ndiscuss in detail whether their decision is justified. (You should, of course, discuss the implications of the SCC\ufffd\ufffd\ufffds decision for the right to free speech in Canada.)\n\n(If you choose this topic, you will need to obtain more information about this important case, but you should be able to obtain it from the Internet.)\n\n2.\tDo Human Rights Neglect Human Duties? An objection that is sometimes raised against human rights and the human rights movement is that they neglect and\n\ndownplay the importance of human duties, which tended to be given more weight in traditional morality and culture. Discuss in detail how plausible and serious this\n\nobjection is. Some helpful sources to look at are the following:\n\n1. Reading 12, Andreas Follesdhal, \ufffd\ufffd\ufffdHuman Rights and Relativism\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd, on CuLearn\n2. \ufffd\ufffd\ufffdRights without Duties\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd, by Dr. Mark Cooray, from Australian Achievement: From Bondage to Freedom, at\nhttp:\/\/www.ourcivilisation.com\/cooray\/btof\/chap226.htm\n3. \ufffd\ufffd\ufffdRights versus Duties: Reclaiming Civic Balance\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd, by Samuel Moyn, in the Boston Review\nhttp:\/\/bostonreview.net\/books-ideas\/samuel-moyn-rights-duties     ( Moyn is the author of the book Christian Human Rights )\n\n3.\tThe concept of a human right in non-Western cultures: In Reading 18 Jack Donnelly argues that the concept of a HR is (was) not present in non-Western cultures\n\naround the world (prior to contact with European or Western cultures).\n\nIs Donnelly correct in making this claim? If his thesis is correct, would this mean that the concept of a human right is distinctively Western and is not really\n\napplicable to non-Western societies and cultures? In other words, would Donnelly\ufffd\ufffd\ufffds thesis imply that the human rights movement, which seeks to promote human rights in\n\nall societies, is actually a form of Western imperialism? (Reading 19 by Kwasi Wiredu is also relevant to this issue.)\n\n4.\tTorture: In Reading 49, \ufffd\ufffd\ufffdTorture for Dummies: Exploding the \ufffd\ufffd\ufffdticking bomb\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd Argument\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd, Michael Kingsley argues that the ban against torture should be absolute\n\nand that no exceptions should be permitted. Explain Kingsley\ufffd\ufffd\ufffds argument for this thesis clearly, but concisely, and then discuss it in detail.  (All of the readings on\n\ntorture in the course pack are relevant to this topic, and many additional readings can be found online.) Kingsley\ufffd\ufffd\ufffds article is available at:\n\nhttp:\/\/www.slate.com\/id\/2132195\/\n\nAs an alternative to the above article by Kingsley, you could explain and discuss the article \ufffd\ufffd\ufffdHow to Argue Against Torture\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd, by Bernard Chazelle, which is available\n\nat http:\/\/www.cs.princeton.edu\/~chazelle\/politics\/torture09.html\n\n5.\tNegative and Positive Rights: Traditionally a distinction has been drawn between what are called \ufffd\ufffd\ufffdnegative rights\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd and \ufffd\ufffd\ufffdpositive rights\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd. With this distinction\n\ndrawn, it was then argued by some, particularly those sympathetic with the libertarian ideology, that all genuine human rights are negative and that there are actually\n\nno positive human rights. If correct, this would mean that there are no social and economic human rights (e.g. the right to social welfare, employment insurance or\n\nhealth care services) since these are clearly positive in form. Others have argued that the distinction between negative and positive rights collapses in the face of\n\ncriticism and therefore cannot be used as a basis for rejecting economic and social rights. Still others have defended the distinction but reject the assumption that\n\ngenuine human rights must be negative.\n\nConsider in detail which of these, or possibly other, alternative positions with respect to the distinction between negative and positive rights and its implications\n\nis most plausible and defensible. Reading 47 by Tibor Machon and Reading 48 by Holmes and Sunstein are very relevant to this topic. Other sources can be found online.\n\n6.\tThe Right to Development: In Reading 55 Thomas Pogge argues that there is what he describes as a \ufffd\ufffd\ufffdnegative right\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd to development on the part of developing\n\ncountries around the world, and that this right is currently being violated by the international community (especially by affluent Western countries who exert so much\n\ncontrol over the international financial and economic system). In Reading 43 Debra Satz presents a number of criticisms of Pogge\ufffd\ufffd\ufffds position.\n\nExplain clearly what this disagreement is about, and then discuss in detail whose position is more plausible.\n\n7.\tHuman Rights and the Status of Women: In Reading 60 Hilary Charlesworth argues that human rights declarations such as the UDHR, and the human rights movement\n\nin general, have not been very effective in defending women from a variety of different abuses. She suggests further that this is not merely a failure of enforcement\n\nand protection of the rights of women, but that the problem stems from the very concept of a human right as it has been traditionally understood. To ensure that there\n\nare adequate protections for human rights, therefore, she argues that our understanding of human rights must be revised in important respects.\n\nDo you agree with Charlesworth that the problem is deeper than mere enforcement and protection of women\ufffd\ufffd\ufffds rights? If you do agree with her, then explain how the\n\nconcept of a human right needs to be modified so as to accommodate the rights of women. If you don\ufffd\ufffd\ufffdt agree with her, then defend your view by argument.\n\n8.\tIs there a serious issue about how genocide should be defined? In Reading 45 the philosopher Paul Boghossian presents what he regards as a number of serious\n\ndifficulties for the definition of genocide contained in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1948. On the basis of these\n\ndifficulties, which he thinks may well have no satisfactory solution, Boghossian suggests that there is actually no need for a concept of genocide.\n\nIf you choose to write on this topic, there a number of different questions you should try to answer: How serious are the difficulties that Boghossian raises? Do you\n\nagree that they may have no solution? And, finally, do you agree with Boghossian that we don\ufffd\ufffd\ufffdt really need a concept of genocide? (The other readings under the topic\n\nof Genocide are relevant to this topic.)\n\nNote: Needless to say, there are other topics in the philosophy of human rights on which one could write a term paper. You may therefore write your paper on some other\n\ntopic (including possible variations on the above topics), but you must clear it with me first to ensure that it is both manageable and sufficiently relevant to the\n\ncourse.\n\n\nEvaluation of Your Paper\n\nYour term paper will be evaluated on the basis of the following criteria:\n\n\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\tPresentation of your ideas (e.g. writing style, organization, clarity of exposition)\n\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\tStrength of your arguments and analyses\n\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\tCreativity in dealing with the problems or issues being addressed\n\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\tOverall understanding of the issues you are discussing\n\n\nAdditional Comments, Instructions and Advice\n\nBefore Writing\n\nOne of the keys to writing a good paper is to be clear about what you want to say. You should, therefore, try to get as clear as you can about your topic before you\n\nstart writing. Your views might evolve as you go along \ufffd\ufffd\ufffd that is to be expected \ufffd\ufffd\ufffd but, if you don\ufffd\ufffd\ufffdt have some objectives in mind before starting to write, you will\n\nhave nothing to give you direction.\n\nYou should definitely make an outline of your essay, and you should plan on writing several drafts. You cannot expect to write a good paper in one draft. I also\n\nencourage you to discuss your topic with other students in the class, as this is often a very helpful and enjoyable way to develop ideas. In the end, of course, you\n\nmust write your paper yourself.\n\n\nPoints of Style\n\nRemember that you are writing an essay and so, obviously, you must write in complete sentences with appropriate paragraph breaks, and so forth. Other than this, there\n\nis no special format that you need to follow. It sometimes helps the reader to follow what\ufffd\ufffd\ufffds being said if an essay is divided into different sections with appropriate\n\nheadings and sub-headings. This is up to you, though there shouldn\ufffd\ufffd\ufffdt be too many headings, otherwise your paper will appear too fragmented.\n\nYou may use a somewhat informal writing style if you wish. For example, use of the first person is acceptable, as in \ufffd\ufffd\ufffdMy own view is ..\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd or \ufffd\ufffd\ufffdI am inclined to think\n\nthat \ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd However, be careful not to overwork such phrases, and avoid being too colloquial. It is best to write in a clear, straightforward style. Don\ufffd\ufffd\ufffdt try to sound too\n\nintellectual or academic, especially if you don\ufffd\ufffd\ufffdt feel comfortable or natural writing in such a style.\n\nOrganization\n\nIt is probably best to start your essay by stating as clearly as you can what issue you are going to be discussing. You may have to provide some background before you\n\nbegin to develop your own ideas, and you may also need to clarify the question you are addressing. But you should do this as concisely as you can so that the bulk of\n\nthe essay consists of your critical discussion of the issue.\n\nComments about Content\n\nRemember that this is primarily a discussion paper, not a research paper. You may consult library or Internet sources for additional information about your topic, but\n\nthis is not mainly what I am looking for. In writing your essay your main goal should be to say something interesting about the topic you have selected. To say\n\nsomething interesting about it, you must say something that is original and creative. This is another reason why you must think carefully about your topic before you\n\nbegin writing, as you must determine whether you have any interesting things to say about it. If you can\ufffd\ufffd\ufffdt seem to come up with anything, maybe you should switch to\n\nanother topic.\n\nGive Arguments\n\nRemember also that this is a philosophical paper, not an exercise in rhetoric. It is not enough merely to express your opinion, regardless of how elegantly you do so.\n\nI want you to be as forceful and persuasive as you can be, of course, but you must not engage in overstatement or exaggeration. To be persuasive in writing a\n\nphilosophical paper means supporting your views by carefully reasoned and detailed arguments.\n\nSome Common Mistakes to Avoid\n\n-Elaborate, artificial introductions \ufffd\ufffd\ufffd try to get to the point fairly quickly\n-Repetition, except very selectively for emphasis, and stating (or worse, defending) the obvious\n-Being too colloquial, although an informal writing style, including use of the 1st person, is acceptable\n-Sentences that are too long or complicated to be clear, vagueness, ambiguity, and clich\ufffd\ufffds\n-Overstatement, exaggeration, hyperbole, appealing to emotion or popular belief\n-Grammatical mistakes (incomplete sentences and run-on sentences are common mistakes)\n-Using too many quotations (only quote when necessary)\n-Padding to get the required length \ufffd\ufffd\ufffd this is easy for graders to spot\n\nDo not plagiarize \ufffd\ufffd\ufffd the penalties are severe: It is the responsibility of each student to understand the meaning of 'plagiarism' as defined in the Carleton University\n\nCalendar, and to avoid both committing plagiarism and aiding\/abetting plagiarism by other students.\n\n\nFor more detailed advice about how to write a philosophy paper, you might find it helpful to look at Peter Horban, \ufffd\ufffd\ufffdWriting a Philosophy Paper\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd, Simon Fraser\n\nUniversity, 1993. (Just Google the name and title to get the web page)\n\n\n\n\n<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Philosophy 2103: Philosophy of Human Rights Format \ufffd\ufffd\ufffd No title page needed, just put the title of your paper, your name and student number on 1st page \ufffd\ufffd\ufffd 5-8 pages (1,500-2,000 words), 12 point font, double-spaced \ufffd\ufffd\ufffd In citing references, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/philosophy-2103-philosophy-of-human-rights\/\" class=\"read-more\">Read More &#8230;<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5701","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5701","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5701"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5701\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5701"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5701"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5701"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}