Dichotomy Of Universalism And Relativism

Utilitarianism is a philosophical theory that states something is considered to be right when it does the most good for most the most amount of people (Duignan 2015). This theory doesn’t consider the feelings of the individual; it considers the feelings of the majority (Duignan 2015). Utilitarianism is very different from relativism, which takes into account the totality of circumstances, this philosophical theory states that what is considered to be right or wrong can vary depending on people and society (Rachels 2015).

In a world in which people have fundamental disagreements regarding the substance and purpose of human existence and what constitute ‘the good life’, it is a question how should human rights be installed within a nation’s legal system. This essay argues that because we cannot ascertain without doubt what human’s nature is, and in order to prevent atrocities as those in the Second World War: all humans should enjoy, as members of the human species, fundamental rights to secure their existence. Hence, within a nation’s legal system, those are known to be civil rights. Further, political rights should be ensured firstly to the citizens of that nation, but, due to the rapid globalization and the growing fluidity of boarders (for example in Europe)

The concept of the universal declaration of human rights is to give everyone equal rights and to take away single incidents or “accidents”. The value of people’s views keep peace and justice in the world. The quote “whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of justice and peace in the world” (UN Commission 1-3). The text also explains how the man is inclined to the right of other men and the ability to provide justice does not require

On a global political stand point there was a uniting of ideas and governments; what we know today as the United Nations (UN). One of the main ideas which the UN has grown up around is ‘The individual possess rights simply by virtue of being Human’ (The Universal Declaration of human rights); which was adopted by the general assembly in 10th December 1948. This statement is reflect in the core principles

“History doesn’t repeat itself, but it does rhyme.” as Mark Twain is often reputed to have said explains with much rhetoric that in fact history is not repeated in a sense that the same events happen over and over again, instead events embrace similar themes. The same concept of Mr. Twain’s history comparison can be brought in support of why the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) drafted in 1948 by the UN --an international agreement that dictates basic rights and undeniable freedoms in which all human beings are entitled to-- should be updated. After analyzing the Human Rights Treaty it was concluded that amending the UDHR should be considered because of advancements in the world, in main part due to globalization and

It was argued that these tensions originate from the conflicting values upon which human rights and democracy were distinctly founded, the ways in which they are applied and the kinds of politics that they make room for. The careful juggling between the preservation of democratic institutions and the protection of human rights will thus remain shaky, even in the best of times. These tensions have risen out of the rift between liberal democracy’s conceptualization of the universal Man and the national citizen, or rather, “the real beneficiary of rights” (Douzinas 2013, 56). Since rights form the basis upon which people are allocated into rulers, ruled, and excluded, it is hard to imagine a utopia in which human rights exist for those who do not belong to a demos (Douzinas 2013,

“The French deputies of the Estates General reborn as the National Assembly of 1789 didn’t just want to proclaim the rights of Frenchmen but those for all times and all nations.” It is recognized as the greatest expression of human rights. This was a declaration whose primary goal was two fold. It served to protect individuals from government and form the basis of a new government. It is the model for future societies seeking freedom and self government. The ideas expounded in the declaration were revolutionary when they saw the light of day in 1789 and they have survived and from them we recognize the creation of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) 1948, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch (1978) and a Bill of Rights (American Constitution)and that truly makes them revolutionary. All these organizations seek a guarantee of individual rights and limitations on governments and 250 years later, they reflect the thinking of the writers of the Declaration of the Rights of

This article is relevant in the context of increasing global concern over human rights. More recent debates in international relations discuss the importance of the individual over that of states and sovereignty, especially in a society in which national and global boundaries are being transcended and constantly undermined. Multiple levels

The Journal, “Cultural Relativist and Feminist Critiques of International Human Rights – Friends or Foes?, by Oonagh Reitman seeks to address about the similarities between two critiques of international human rights that come from both cultural relativist and feminist. The critique comes from the claim that human rights are universal and both cultural relativist and feminist disagree about the universalism in human rights. The author argue that whether feminist and cultural relativist is friends or foes regarding that both of them are same in criticizing the international human rights but at the same situation they oppose each other in the realm of women’s international human rights. In the section 1 of the paper, it already explained about

In a growing westernized society built on the principles of freedom, it important to note that the rest of the world is not as privileged as civilization has not always been this way. The idea of state sovereignty, the legal authority of a government over its population, has evolved and adapted throughout history. Post World War II, the world was is an utter shock of what humanity was capable of. Moving forward, a variety of political institutions and documents were created in order to protect global human rights. However many of these institutions were mostly composed of western ideologies and European norms, that by imposing them on the rest of the world can be seen as cultural imperialism (Calhoun, p.15-17). Due to different social, political,

Donnelly concerns shows that the argument shows what I take to be the main strength of the article. It is a thoroughly logically diverse question that have been taken together and by doing so provides clearer and more specific understandings of constantly disputed points. Distinguishing what he calls intangible, useful, legal global, overlapping agreement and anthropological. Donnelly describes that the question of whether human rights are diverse and is well understood as a related set of inquiries into how they might be common. These divergent questions have different answers that he tends to defends as conceptual, functional, legal international, and overlapping consensus universality whereas holding that study of people, society and cultural universality are politically weak.

Governments first committed to establish an international framework, and create a more equal world in 1948 when the UN General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. More than 65 years later, people still remain a distant hope and vague aspiration to achieve these basic entitlements for all the world. Despite rapid advancements in standards of living

However, this is debated which I will go into more detail later on. It had the inspiration to promote friendly relations between nations and it is emphasised that all nations should cooperate. Though, this can be said to be naive as to go as far to declare that all countries abide by the Declaration and that it is universal is mistaken. What does it mean to be universal? The concept believes that human rights belong to all human being and that it is fundamental and essential to every type of society. Those who disagree that human rights are universal believe that human rights are based on your culture, it has to be understood that a right for one group maybe outright intolerable to members of another group. Human rights are being viewed as being too ‘Western’ and representing specific cultural norms and belief system of some cultures and societies rather than all. This is the cultural relativist argument, the belief that human rights cannot be applied to non-Western nations. The belief has been endorsed by many political leaders, Singapore’s former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew suggested that the ‘Western concepts of democracy and human rights will not work in Asia, by explaining that the West is too individualistic compared to family-orientated Asia. ‘What Asians value may not necessarily be what Americans or Europeans value? Westerners value the freedoms and liberties of the individual. As an Asian of Chinese cultural background, my values are for a government which is

Moreover, in what is seen, a global citizen is that of people putting aside religion and political views that cause so much controversy inn the world we live in. What should be recognized are morals and common views that everyone can somewhat seem to agree on. One example is the Gordon Rule- treat others as you would want to be treated. Now the most known example for that is to have respect towards one another. A global citizen indeed should acquire this and understand it fully. In addition, basic morals that seem right also come along in being an ideal global citizen, such as being against dehumanization. Taking away what basically makes you, you is something that is not agreed with the views of a global citizen.

“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.” These opening words of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights express a concept of man which underpins the framework of human rights embodied in the Universal Declaration and the two international covenants of Human Rights. Western political traditions is a concept that it derives from, is in harmony with moral and social teachings to be found in many other traditions and patterns of belief.