Naturalism or Pragmatism? Towards an Expansive View of Human Rights

This article compares the naturalistic account of human rights in James Griffin's On Human Rights (2009) with the practical account by Charles R. Beitz in The Idea of Human Rights (2009). Taking Griffin's own examples, the analysis suggests that Griffin's account of human rights with regard to children, divorce, or marriage is unconvincing. However, while the practical approach is preferred, this leaves the basis for any universal duty to take state action for human rights violations uncertain. The article concludes by proposing an analysis of human rights that retains the advantages of the practical conception but accounts for the justification of international action through the principle of universalizability of moral obligations.