This fully revised and extended edition of James Nickel's classic study explains and defends the conception of human rights found in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and subsequent human rights treaties. Combining philosophical, legal, and political approaches, Nickel addresses questions about what human rights are, what their content should be, and whether and how they can be justified.

The concept of human dignity is increasingly invoked in bioethical debate and, indeed, in international instruments concerned with biotechnology and biomedicine. While some commentators consider appeals to human dignity to be little more than rhetoric and not worthy of serious consideration, the authors of this groundbreaking new study give such appeals distinct and defensible meaning through an application of the moral theory of Alan Gewirth.

The principle of respect for human dignity plays a crucial role in the emerging global norms relating to bioethics, in particular in the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights. This instrument, which is a legal, not merely an ethical document, can be regarded as an extension of international human rights law into the field of biomedicine. Although the Declaration does not explicitly define human dignity, it would be a mistake to see the emphasis put on this notion as (...) a mere rhetorical strategy. Rather, the appeal to dignity reflects a real concern about the need to promote respect both for the intrinsic worth of human beings and for the integrity of the human species. But dignity alone cannot solve most of the dilemmas posed by biomedical practice. This is why international biolaw combines, on the one hand, the appeal to human dignity as an overarching principle with, on the other hand, the recourse to human rights, which provide an effective and practical way forward for dealing with bioethical issues at a global level. (shrink)

This paper highlights a feature common to many ethical guidelines—namely, the idea that the interests of the individual shall always prevail over the interests of science and society. The paper presents how some major ethical guidelines treat the balancing of research interests against those of research subjects and spells out the difficulties in interpreting the principle of the primacy of the individual in a way that can be action-guiding. It suggests various alternative interpretations of the primacy of the individual and (...) argues that they do not hold. Finally, the implications of this analysis for ethical guidelines are discussed. (shrink)

Historically, the idea of human dignity as a legal concept appears later than that of human rights, and that is something that can be seen both in normative texts and legal decisions and doctrine. Nevertheless, the author maintains the theory that a close conceptual relationship has existed between both notions from the beginning, although then only implicitly. He argues, firstly, that human dignity is not a classifying term adopted subsequently to join symbolically a multitude of different rights, that it is (...) not merely the empty expression of a catalogue of isolated and unconnected human rights, but rather the moral source which nourishes the contents of all fundamental rights. The author then examines the catalyst role played by the concept of dignity in the composition of human rights, from rational morality on one hand, and in the form of subjective rights, on the other. Finally, he maintains that the extraction of human rights from the moral source of human dignity explains the expanding political force of a specific utopia, which the author defends, both against the global rejection that human rights sometimes suffered, as against the recent attempts directed at the deactivation of their radical content. (shrink)

Can the view that medical science is more important than the individual properly persuade recruitment to trials? This paper considers the nature and interests of the person and their relationships to the concepts of science and society; and analyses a conception of value used to balance the interests of science and research subjects. The implications of arguments opposing the primacy of the individual are set out to indicate their implausibility; while the primacy principle is described to show its necessity in (...) any moral society. Finally, the importance of fully informed consent to participate is explained with the requirement that the individual human life provide the criteria of moral value for human life. (shrink)

L'empire du droit est le maître ouvrage de Ronald Dworkin, étudié et discuté par les professeurs et les théoriciens, par les juristes et les juges, par les étudiants et les acteurs de la vie politique aux Etats-Unis et ailleurs. Comment les juges établissent-ils le droit (et comment devraient-ils le faire)? Il montre que les juges doivent se prononcer sur les cas difficiles en interprétant, au lieu de se contenter d'appliquer, les jugements rendus antérieurement, et il énonce une théorie générale de (...) l'interprétation, en littérature comme en droit, et des cas où une interprétation doit l'emporter sur les autres. Toute interprétation juridique est le reflet d'une théorie sous-jacente sur la nature d'ensemble du droit : Ronald Dworkin évalue les mérites de trois de ces théories. L'une, le conventionnalisme, considère que le droit qui gouverne une collectivité se borne à la définition qu'en donnent les conventions en usage dans cette collectivité. Selon une autre théorie, le pragmatisme, très estimé aujourd'hui, la meilleure définition de la pratique juridique est celle d'un instrument devant aider une société à atteindre ses objectifs. Dworkin s'élève avec vigueur et avec persuasion contre ces deux points de vue et défend une troisième théorie du droit, celle du droit-intégrité. Il souligne que l'intérêt fondamental du droit n'est pas de faire état d'un consensus, ni de fournir des moyens efficaces pour parvenir aux objectifs que s'est fixés une société donnée, mais de répondre à l'exigence d'une collectivité politique agissant envers chacun de ses membres sur la base cohérente de principes définis. A la lumière de cette conception, il étudie certains cas dans le cadre de la Common Law, d'autres entrés en fonction du droit écrit, et les grands cas de droit constitutionnel soumis à la Cour suprême. Il démontre systématiquement que le concept d'intégrité politique et juridique est la clef de la théorie comme de la pratique juridiques dans le système anglo-américain. (shrink)