| | A somewhat similar approach to that by Rasmussen & Den Uyl has been available from me--see Individuals and Their Rights (1989) and, even earlier, Human Rights and Human Liberties (1975). My Classical Individualism (1998) also contains some points pertinent to the relationship between human flourishing and natural rights. The main difference is that Rasmussen & Den Uyl make very explicit the idea that no direct derivation of natural rights is available from an ethics of flourishing (or egoism or eudaimonism) but, instead, what may be derived is a system of metanorms or legal principles which is best suited to the pursuit of human flourishing or excellence though will not guarantee full harmony between the ethics and the politics (which is to say, it is possible that some cases of pursuing one's flourishing will not support respect for everyone's natural rights). My own work, drawing as it does on Ayn Rand's position, did not consider whether a direct derivation of natural rights from the ethics of flourishing might not be fully successful and that such support may be only available "for the most part," as it were. I am impressed with the Rasmussen/Den Uyl thesis but am not yet fully convinced that they have made a better case for the free society than those working within the Randian framework.
|
|
