<<Different sense of "universal" human rights.>> Universal Relative Relative universality

1. THE RELATIVE UNIVERSALITY OF HUMAN RIGHTSandCONDITIONS OF AN UNFORCED CONSENSUS ON HUMAN JACK DONNELLYCHARLES TAYLOR

2. <<Different sense of "universal" human rights.>> • Universal • Relative • Relative universality • Limits of the universality • Conceptual universality • Human rights are "universal" rights which are held "universally" by all human rights. • Substantive universality • Norm creation has been internationalized. • Enforcement is left to sovereign states.

3. <<Historical universality>> Most society have practiced human rights through their history. No concrete practice or vision of individual human rights before 17th century. Any society other than Western society did not develop human rights ideas before 20th century

4. <<Functional universality>> First human rights idea formed in the modern west John Locke Ideas arose from social, economic, and political transformation of modernity So, We must deal with market economies and bureaucratic states. We all need equal and inalienable universal human rights to protect us from them.

5. << International legal universality>> The Universal Declaration of Human Rights Most states accept the declaration. Human rights are chosen over competing conceptions of national political legitimacy.

6. <<Overlapping Consensus >> • John Rawls • "Comprehensive religious, philosophical, or moral doctrines" • "Political conception of justice" • Varieties of doctrines in Human rights • Even "Asian values" are regarded to support human rights. • In principle, • Varieties of social practices (except for HR) can be the basis for achieving founder mental equal values. • In practice, • HR preferred option.

7. <<Voluntary / coerced consensus>> Concensus among nations over the Universal Declaration was largely voluntary decision. << Ontological universality>> = having single moral code on human rights 3 problems of ontological universality It is impossible to involve those who belong to other religion or philosophies. Prominent doctorines have ignored or denied human rights in their history. It would regards that all moral and religious theories as false or immoral.

8. <<Cultural relativity>> = cultures differ across the time and space • Methodological cultural relativism • Substantive cultural relativism • Culture provides absolute standards of evaluation • 6 problems of substantive cultural relativism • Risking reducing "right" to "traditional," " good" to "old" and "obligatory" to habitual

9. <<Self-determination and sovergenity>> = mutual recognition of people and states in an international community. Justice - self-determination Order - sovergenity <<Post-star actual, post-colonial, and critical arguments>> = new stream of relativist (anti-universalist)

10. <<Relative universality>> =not only defensible but also desirable • Human rights are relatively universal at the level of the concept. • Particular rights concepts have multiple defensible conceptions. • Particular conceptions will have many defensible implementations.

11. <<Right to choose religion>> • Islamic law prohibits Muslims to change their religion • Compatible with Article 18 (Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.) • Freedom does not mean becoming religious neutrality. • No guarantee of changing religion without cost • However, executing is not permitted. • “Human rights seek to allow human beings” “to pursue their own visions of the good life.”

12. <<Universalism without imeralism>> • “faulse” universalism • When a powerful actor is seeking own interests for universal values. • To prevent such arrogant “universalism” • International legal universality • Overlapping consensus universality

13. CHARLES TAYLOR • Born in 1931 (He is now 82 years old) • Canadian philosopher from Montreal, Quebec • Was a professor of political philosophy at McGill University • Roman Catholic • Influenced by Aristote, Hegel, Tocqueville, etc.,

14. Unforced International Consensus on Human Rights • John Rawls « overlapping consensus » • This idea was already expressed by Jacques Maritain in 1949: « the way of justifying belief in the rights of man and the ideal of liberty, equality, fraternity is the only way with a firm foundation in truth. » ⇒Is this kind of consensus POSSIBLE?

15. SUBJECTIVE RIGHTS • Concepts 1) Played a big role in medieval societies: formed the basis of a philosophical view of humans and their society. 2) Was the basis of the rewriting of Natural Law theory into Fundamental Law in 17C. • Two are connected: the force of the underlying philosophy promotes constantly the legal norm in our politico-legal systems. • Governments in different legislation levels can get out from the conflict with these fundamental rights.

16. FOUR CONFLICTS • LAW (resolved by legal innovation) • CULTURE＆TRADITION • RELIGION • HIERARCHY AND IDENTITY

17. SECOND CONFLICT • Raising critiques of Western-centrism • HR defenders are insisting on their own social rights • This causes: self-regarding among people, social conflict, weaken social solidarity and raise the threat of violence ⇒All VS All • Difference of cultures and traditions are the trigger • Building a framework in which to considers differences

18. THIRD CONFLICT • « Communitarian » critique against Western philosophical justification • HR defenders attempt to purify Buddhism: separation of religion and politics to focus more on the original goal of Enlightenment. • In Buddhism notion, individual take responsibility for one’s Enlightenment and leads to non-violence (ahimsa) • Conception provides a link between agenda of HR and democratic development

19. LAST CONFLICT • The satisfactory end does not exist • In discussion, consensus is distinguished from mutual understanding and have occur sequentially • The road to a consensus is the opposite from the last three conflicts

20. THE ADDING DIFFERENCE • Misconception and condemnation drive us away from making consensus • Differences in spiritual or theological basis might be found for a convergence on norms.(International HR standards and certain facts of Shari’a) • Development of Western philosophical thought and sensibility gives particular force to the condemnation.

21. CONCLUSION OF TAYLOR • Norms, legal forms and background justifications are necessary • West people should regain a more adequate view of their history that interwoven in the development and hence be prepared to understand the spiritual paths of different people’s toward the converging goal. • Taylor advises HR defenders to refrain from presenting these rights as a radical break from the past so as to prevent fundamentalist backlashes that will only serve to prevent the movement toward agreement.

22. MY CONCLUSION REGARDING TAYLOR’S ARGUMENT • Might be an alternative to seek an consensus rather than disagreeing to each other based on the unsolvable matter (culture, religion, etc.,) • His argument, “conception of Buddhism provides a link between agenda of HR and democratic development” gave me a new point of view.