rights beyond liberties (Rawls, 197

rights beyond liberties (Rawls, 1971, Benn and
Peters, 1959: 72, 93; Dworkin, 1977; Nozick, 1974). They
largely ignore Hohfeld’s clarification of rights. Liberties
are assumed to be open to the extent that they can be
achieved unilaterally, while Hohfeld’s claims, powers,
and immunities cannot. However, no right is totally
unilateral because even liberties are limited when they
conflict with other people’s liberties and where they
require societal enforcement and group support mechanisms.
Liberal legal theorists like Nozick (1974), Dworkin
(1977), and Mead (1986) often ignore, downplay, or
subordinate Hohfeld’s multilateral rights. Hart (1983:
217) summarizes two of these positions: ‘For Nozick the
supreme value is freedom – the unimpeded individual
will; for Dworkin it is equality of concern and respect …’
Though their theories may differ on many counts, their
focus is on atomistic individual rights (Wolgast, 1987:
12–18), which biases their analysis of rights in the direction
of liberties away from claims and powers.

ผลลัพธ์ (อังกฤษ) 2:

Beyond liberties rights (Rawls, 1971st, Benn and
Peters, 1 959: 72, 93; Dworkin, in 1977; Nozick, the 1,974th). They
largely ignore Hohfeld's Clarification of rights. Liberties
are assumed to be open to the extent that they Can be
achieved unilaterally, while Hohfeld's Claims, powers,
and immunities Can not. However, no Right is totally
unilateral because even liberties are Limited when they
Conflict with Other people's liberties and where they
Require societal Enforcement and Group Support Mechanisms.
Liberal Legal theorists like Nozick (1,974), Dworkin
(1977), and Mead (1,986th) often. ignore, downplay, or
subordinate Hohfeld's multilateral rights. Hart (one thousand nine hundred and eighty-three:
217) summarizes Two of these Positions: 'For Nozick the
Supreme VALUE is Freedom - the individual Unimpeded
Will; Dworkin it is of Concern for equality and respect ... '
Though their theories differ on May MANY counts, their
Atomistic Focus is on individual rights (Wolgast, the 1987th:
12-18), which biases Analysis of their rights in the direction
of liberties Away from. claims and powers.