Save

Normative Agency and Cross-Cultural Human Rights in East Asia

In: Comparative Political Theory
Authors:
Daniel P. Corrigan Department of Philosophy, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, US

Search for other papers by Daniel P. Corrigan in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
and
Bradford Cokelet Department of Philosophy, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, US

Search for other papers by Bradford Cokelet in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Download Citation Get Permissions

Access options

Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below.

Institutional Login

Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials

Login via Institution

Purchase

Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):

$40.00

Abstract

According to James Griffin (2008) human rights should be grounded in an account of human dignity, based on “normative agency” – the human capacity to choose and pursue a conception of a worthwhile life. In this paper we take up Griffin’s insight that key legitimate human rights are designed to respect and protect this basic capacity, but reject his assumption that normative agency should always and everywhere be understood in a Western way. We argue that “normative agency” is an indeterminate concept that can be differently understood in different cultural contexts and that thinking about human rights in East Asia should be guided by a Griffin-style approach coupled with an account of normative agency with East Asian characteristics. In developing this idea, we contrast our account with recent, moralized conceptions of Confucian dignity and respond to Griffin’s tacit worries about how to concretely implement views like ours in institutional practice.

Content Metrics

All Time Past 365 days Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 110 110 15
Full Text Views 4 4 0
PDF Views & Downloads 10 10 0