To defend the explanatory power of the choice theory of rights,choice theorists have put forward the impossibility theorem,the proposition of moral priority,and the redundancy theory of rights to deny the existence of...To defend the explanatory power of the choice theory of rights,choice theorists have put forward the impossibility theorem,the proposition of moral priority,and the redundancy theory of rights to deny the existence of inalienable rights.However,the impossibility theorem confuses power and privilege and breaks through basic legal relations;the proposition of moral priority shifts from the importance of rights to the absoluteness of rights by refusing to recognize the“threshold”of rights;the redundancy theory of rights ignores the“severity increasing effect”of rights.Therefore,the accusation made by choice theorists is groundless.展开更多
基金a phased result of the important project“A Research of General Secretary Xi Jinping’s Important Statement on Respecting and Safeguarding Human Rights”(No.228ZD004)supported by National Social Science Fund of Chinathe SWUPL student scientific research innovation project of 2021(No.2021XZXS-070)。
文摘To defend the explanatory power of the choice theory of rights,choice theorists have put forward the impossibility theorem,the proposition of moral priority,and the redundancy theory of rights to deny the existence of inalienable rights.However,the impossibility theorem confuses power and privilege and breaks through basic legal relations;the proposition of moral priority shifts from the importance of rights to the absoluteness of rights by refusing to recognize the“threshold”of rights;the redundancy theory of rights ignores the“severity increasing effect”of rights.Therefore,the accusation made by choice theorists is groundless.
