levo

Human Rights: Rules and Theory

Utilitarian and positivist objections to natural rights

  • 3 things to know
  • Components 2 and 3

Overview

Standard objection to leaving rights to utilitarian calculation, john Stuart Mill's harm principle and cultural relativist criticism of universal human rights.

What you need to know

Answer each one before you reveal it.

Your recallNot started
Key term

Which utilitarian philosopher dismissed natural rights as nonsense upon stilts?

Key term

Why did Bentham reject the idea of a right that exists before law?

Key term

What does legal positivism say about the validity of a law?

Questions from this subtopic

Each one with the model answer underneath.

  1. 1

    Which utilitarian philosopher dismissed natural rights as nonsense upon stilts?

    Model answer

    Jeremy Bentham dismissed imprescriptible natural rights as nonsense upon stilts. Bentham made the remark in Anarchical Fallacies, an attack on the French declaration of rights.

  2. 2

    Why did Bentham reject the idea of a right that exists before law?

    Model answer

    Bentham held that a right is the product of a legal rule and nothing else. Talk of rights without a law behind them was, for Bentham, empty rhetoric.

  3. 3

    What does legal positivism say about the validity of a law?

    Model answer

    Legal positivism says a rule is valid if it was made in the way the legal system requires. Moral merit is a separate question from legal validity on the positivist account.

  4. 4

    How does utilitarianism assess a proposed restriction on a freedom?

    Model answer

    Utilitarianism weighs the restriction by its consequences for overall welfare. A limit on freedom is justified where it produces the greater balance of good.

  5. 5

    State the standard objection to leaving rights to utilitarian calculation.

    Model answer

    Utilitarian calculation can justify sacrificing a minority where the majority gains more. A right is meant to resist exactly that kind of trade-off.

  6. 6

    How did Ronald Dworkin answer the utilitarian argument?

    Model answer

    Ronald Dworkin described rights as trumps that individuals hold against collective goals. A government on that view may not override a right merely because the public benefit is larger.

Other ways to work this

The same content, four other ways.

What is inside Levo

Six ways to work the same material.

1Closed book
2Open book
3Closed book

The 3-step method, run for you

Answer cold, learn it, then prove it stuck. Levo tracks the jump between your first attempt and your last.

Parliamentary and European Law Making
Delegated Legislation
Statutory Interpretation
Judicial Precedent

Cram a whole paper in one sitting

Sort every topic into what you know and what you do not, then drill only the weak ones.

The court sits in .
StrasbourgLondonParis

Blank Blitz makes facts automatic

Rapid timed gap-fills on the terms and numbers you need to recall without thinking.

AAn interim injunction restrains publication before trial.
BPublication cannot be undone.
CAn injunction may be the only effective remedy.

Build It gets the exam shape right

Assemble a full-mark answer from its marking points, in the order an examiner wants them.

A Public Bill changes the general law.
TrueFalse

Test It catches misconceptions

Spot the fault in a statement. The traps are the mistakes students actually make.

721941163128510

Brain Breaks between sessions

Short focus games to reset attention, so the next set lands better than the last.

Every question in Human Rights: Rules and Theory, on a schedule.

Attempt a question from memory, write the correct version, then attempt it again. Levo records the jump between your first attempt and your last, and brings each question back on the day you are due to forget it.

Or £46 a year, about £3.83 a month. Cancel anytime.