| The question of the right to do wrong is the question of whether the right to do moral wrong is possible.If the right to do wrong cannot be proved,then the existence of the right depends entirely on the moral correctness of its contents,and the right will lose its independence and thus its importance,The concept of rights would become "redundant" or "trivial".The key to proving the right to do something wrong is to find value support for it.There are two possible paths: the value path and the eligibility path.The value path appeals to specific objective values,believing that the right to do something wrong can be proved under the independent value,but because the objective value is independent of the right holder and cannot explain the directivity of the obligation,it fails.The qualification path regards the right as a qualification,and having the right will enable the right holder to have the ability to make a claim,and the core of the practice of rights lies in the fact that the right holder makes a claim and the counterparty accepts the answer.The qualification path responds to the directivity of the obligation by means of the "intrinsic position" of the right holder,but it needs to be explained that there is an inevitable connection between the right holder’s request and the counterparty’s acceptance of the answer.In this regard,the possible way out lies in the use of authority theory to explain,so the problem turns into how the right holder has legitimate authority.Explanations can be accomplished with the help of the authority of responsibility.This view advocates the existence of four mutually defining and irreducible second-person concepts,the authority to make claims and requirements,valid claims or requirements,responsibility for a specific person,and the first Two people call reasons,and these four concepts together form a conceptual cycle.The concept of responsibility authority presupposes the following premise:We are in a community of responsibilities to each other,with the same ability to demand and accept responsibility,and we need to see each other as the same rational subjects.These premises demarcate the boundaries between rights and freedoms,which are accepted by us in common practice. |
