Please Don't Use Science or Mathematics in Arguing for Human Rights or Natural Law

A. Artosi
{"title":"Please Don't Use Science or Mathematics in Arguing for Human Rights or Natural Law","authors":"A. Artosi","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9337.2010.00457.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the vast literature on human rights and natural law one finds arguments that draw on science or mathematics to support claims to universality and objectivity. Here are two such arguments: 1) Human rights are as universal (i.e., valid independently of their specific historical and cultural Western origin) as the laws and theories of science; and 2) principles of natural law have the same objective (metahistorical) validity as mathematical principles. In what follows I will examine these arguments in some detail and argue that both are misplaced. A section of the paper will be devoted to a discussion of arguments relying on the historical and cultural specificity (and intrinsic superiority) of Western science. The conclusion is that both science and mathematics offer little help to anyone wanting to make use of them as paradigms of universality, objectivity, and rationality. Finally, I will draw some consequences for the idea of human rights.","PeriodicalId":408482,"journal":{"name":"Law & Evolution eJournal","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Evolution eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9337.2010.00457.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

In the vast literature on human rights and natural law one finds arguments that draw on science or mathematics to support claims to universality and objectivity. Here are two such arguments: 1) Human rights are as universal (i.e., valid independently of their specific historical and cultural Western origin) as the laws and theories of science; and 2) principles of natural law have the same objective (metahistorical) validity as mathematical principles. In what follows I will examine these arguments in some detail and argue that both are misplaced. A section of the paper will be devoted to a discussion of arguments relying on the historical and cultural specificity (and intrinsic superiority) of Western science. The conclusion is that both science and mathematics offer little help to anyone wanting to make use of them as paradigms of universality, objectivity, and rationality. Finally, I will draw some consequences for the idea of human rights.
请不要用科学或数学来为人权或自然法辩护
在关于人权和自然法的大量文献中,人们可以找到利用科学或数学来支持普遍性和客观性主张的论点。这里有两个这样的论点:1)人权与科学定律和理论一样普遍(即独立于其特定的西方历史和文化起源而有效);2)自然法原理与数学原理具有同样的客观(超历史)有效性。在接下来的文章中,我将详细研究这些论点,并指出两者都是错误的。论文的一部分将专门讨论依赖于西方科学的历史和文化特殊性(以及内在优越性)的论点。结论是,科学和数学对任何想要利用它们作为普遍性、客观性和合理性范例的人都没有什么帮助。最后,我将描绘人权观念的一些后果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信