Alan Gewirth's Theory of Human Rights and Rational Agency

Introduction to Gewirth's Human Rights Framework

The philosophical concepts of human rights are many and varied. Yet one of the theories that stands out most in both approach and application is that of Alan Gewirth. His work demonstrates an ideal that has often been used as a foundation for addressing many public issues, from law to psychology. Within the body of his works, Gewirth argues that "human rights are best defended as necessary prerequisites for individual human beings' exercise of free and rational will," giving license to the concept that all humans have the right to act on their own behalf to meet their own needs and pursue happiness through their own free will.

Hence, the value or requiredness of autonomy is not disproved by pointing to conditions whose efficacy stems from a violation of autonomy. The solution to this problem is to maintain or restore autonomy, not to acquiesce in its violation. As we shall see, this aim requires an effective system of human rights as a way of avoiding elitist restrictions of desire-autonomy in relation to aspiration-fulfillment. Moreover, persons can themselves control, to an important extent, whether they can achieve or approach desire-autonomy.

Though Gewirth does not argue that these actions should be performed in a vacuum, without regard for the rights of others, many philosophers and theorists have pointed out that "Gewirth argues that each individual's claim to the basic means for rationally purposive action is based upon an appeal to a general rather than specific attribute of all relevant agents."

The Principle of Generic Consistency

In a concise and informative article, Andrew Fagan elaborates on this point by offering a deeper explanation of what is meant by Gewirth's supposition of a general attribute of relative agents: "I cannot logically will my own claims to basic human rights without simultaneously accepting the equal claims of all rationally purposive agents to the same basic attributes." Fagan further explains that "Gewirth has argued that there exists an absolute right to life possessed separately and equally by all of us."

Another writer who details Gewirth's beliefs also defines a key point of terminology central to his framework:

This claim that human beings are capable of purposive action is important because it entails a certain formal rationality belonging essentially to the person qua person. Such "rationality" is both inductive — the ability to determine the effectiveness of action in a given empirical situation — and deductive — the ability to eliminate incoherent, inconsistent, and contradictory goals. Given this account of the person as essentially a rational agent, Gewirth goes on to deduce the fundamental principle of morality: the Principle of Generic Consistency.

The Principle of Generic Consistency is an important term to understand when engaging with the concepts central to this discussion.

Applications in Political and Social Theory

Speaking of the application of Gewirth's theory, many researchers across countless fields demonstrate the necessity of prioritizing rights according to the scarcity of resources and the demonstration of greater need. It is entirely possible to further bolster ideals associated with political protection using the ideas of thinkers such as Gewirth. Of this, George Panichas writes:

Neither race, nor ethnicity, nor sex constitute morally relevant factors in the ascription of fundamental rights. A sexual preference for women, a belief in the messiah, or a love of jazz ought neither qualify nor disqualify someone from justifiably laying claim to that which is protected by such rights.

Panichas then joins many others in drawing on the definitive and clear theories of Gewirth to support his case.

Another work addressing the political and responsible application of human dignity in social economics similarly demonstrates a strong application of Gewirth's ideas:

Alan Gewirth's challenge of grounding human dignity in human agency — an aspect of human nature that transcends all cultural differences, regardless of whether they are drawn along lines of ethnic origin, race, class, gender, sexual orientation, or otherwise — paves the road. The fact of plural moralities is simply not relevant for the normative claim of universal human dignity.

Applying Gewirth's ideas, many social and political thinkers are clearly grounded in both older and newer political thought surrounding individuality and the rights of social acceptance and equality.