Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights

“Early legal developments in the area of human rights are said to have emerged from the Magna Carta of 1215, a contract between the English King and Barons who were dissatisfied with the taxes being levied by the monarch. 

The modern concept of human rights is traced to the ideas and texts adopted at the end of the 18th century. In the year 1776, American Declaration of Independence stated that all men are created equal and have certain unalienable rights. The United States and France adopted statements on rights.  The French Declaration of the Rights of Man (1789) and the United States Declaration of Independence (1776) and Bill of Rights articulate various rights to be enjoyed by all citizens including liberty and equality.

We confront with the concept of “universality” in the international legal human rights documents. In December 1948, the international community adopted, by consensus, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 

It is philosophical, for we badly need a clarification of the concepts of human rights, which will enable us to arrive at more certain conclusions about implications. It is ethical, for in everyday life, individuals are those who respect or violate these rights; individuals are those who contribute to their protection by their votes or by their decisions while carrying out their public functions. It is also political, for it is the task of each state to provide the conditions which directly or indirectly make possible for all its citizens to develop their human potentialities and live ‘far from fear and want’. But states also -whatever we may be inclined to say in connection with that- are governed by individuals”

The idea of human rights is justified by means of human dignity or the value of man. Every human person is regarded as a valuable or dignified person, because of having these potentialities in his/her nature. So, the idea of human rights can be justified by means of understanding human dignity or the value of man. The concept of human dignity indicates the ethical dimension of human rights. 6

Human rights are the rights of everyone who belongs to the human species. They are rights which all humans equally enjoy simply because they are human. They are believed to be shared by all human beings undue to their nationality, age, race, gender, language, occupation, religion, income, social standing or sexual orientation. 

Some relying on the clarity and reliability of international human rights documents like Universal Declaration of Human Rights are keen to see the rights mentioned in these documents as a criterion for human rights. The answer of the question which rights consist of human rights is believed to be found in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 7

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, especially its first article provides us a concept of human rights and a concept of human being. “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in the spirit of brotherhood”

The core of idea of human rights, namely being equal in dignity and rights, has been stressed by means of clarifying that everyone is entitled these rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political and other opinion, national and social origin, property, birth or other status. 

When people speak of human rights, they picture the different sides of human rights discourse, activists usually refer to human rights practice or movements, human rights scholars refer mainly conceptual or theoretical problems of human rights.

Theory of human rights focuses on the theoretical or conceptual challenges to the idea of human rights, the definition of human rights and human nature with an inquiry on ethical foundation of human rights that frames the main issue for human rights theorists. 

Kuçuradi answers the question why human beings need a special protection by pointing out the value of human being which is the result of having some properties and potentialities different from other livings or creatures. Kuçuradi’s concept of human rights is grounded on the idea that the human being is a valuable or dignified being because of having these potentialities in him/his nature. 

Some scholars as B. Orend, do not regard it as a necessary job of philosophical inquiry being convinced that we yet know it well. “One cannot say ‘human rights’, of course, without saying both ‘human’ and ‘rights”. The assumption will be made, for now, that there is no need to define exhaustively what a human being is: we are, I suggest, rather well acquainted with such creatures” 

Kant defines human being as a dual creature who belongs to both the world of phenomenon and noumenon. This kind of duality means that man is endowed with reason, meanwhile with desires. 

The question of human nature refers to various aspects of human beings. It refers sometimes to “those characteristics and capabilities which only the human being possesses and which therefore distinguish him as a specific creature. 

Although Nussbaum and Amartya Sen do emphasize the close relationship between capabilities and human rights, they do not use the capabilities approach as a device for the justification of human rights; instead, they find this relation more complicated. Nussbaum believes that the capabilities approach can clarify the concept of human rights and inform people about the goals in public policy. 

That every human being is equal in dignity and rights constitutes the core of human rights idea. 

Katleb introduces an account of human dignity which seems to portray the general use of the term of human dignity. “The core idea of human dignity is that on earth, humanity is the greatest type of beings—or what we call species because we have learned to see humanity as one species in the animal kingdom, which is made up of many other species along with our own— and that every member deserves to be treated in a manner consonant with the high worth of the species”

Katleb considers the human dignity as an existential value; value or worthiness is imputed to the identity of the person or the species. He stipulates that when the truth of identity is at stake, existence is at stake; the matter is existential. The idea of human dignity insists on recognizing the proper identity of individual or species; recognizing what a person is in relation to all other persons and what the species is in relation to all other species. 

She claims that human dignity consists of philosophical or anthropological knowledge of the value of human species, the knowledge of its certain specifications and of achievements in the history of human species. And this knowledge which helps a human individual become conscious of being human and aware of his or her human identity, oblige everyone to treat all human beings in accordance with this value of human being. 

“The universality of human rights is relative to the contemporary world. The particularities of their implementation are relative to history, politics, culture, and particular decisions. Nonetheless, at the level of the concept, as specified in the Universal Declaration, human rights are universal. The formulation “relatively universal” is thus particularly apt. Relativity modifies— operates within the boundaries set by— the universality of the body of interdependent and indivisible internationally recognized human rights. 

“In my view, the concept of human rights conspicuously lacks ‘universal universality’ – at the very least their supposed universality does not exist across times and places. There is thus perhaps a sense in which the conclusion to the second question asked in this book is foregone: human rights are not universal, the concept is flawed, we should not believe in it, and that is the end of the matter” 

The cultural relativist arguments are against the existence of any universal values and ethical norms, and they identify human rights as merely and inherently Western. The historic development of the concept of human rights is often associated with the evolution of Western philosophical and political principles, yet a different perspective could find reference to similar principles concerning mass education, self-fulfilment, respect for others, and the quest to contribute to others’ well-being in Confucian, Hindu, or Buddhist traditions.