In Defense of Claim Rights

Abstract

The claim-right model of rights contends that Hohfeldian ‘claim-rights’ defined in terms of a constitutive correlativity with directed duties mark a distinctive phenomenon encompassing paradigmatic moral rights. Recent criticisms suggest this traditional model faces a dilemma: any plausible specification (i) is extensionally or explanatorily inadequate or (ii) cannot serve a distinct normative purpose intended by those invoking rights. This work defends the claim-right model against this line of critique. It demonstrates that proper understandings of the extensional/explanatory adequacy criteria and the intended taxonomic role claim-rights are meant to fulfil dissolve the apparent dilemma and support the model.