Related Ideas

Review these ideas and then use the BACK key in your browser to return to the page you were on.

Malik's view raises an important question on the nature of individual rights and the purpose to be achieved by adopting a moral or legal scheme including rights. We need to distinguish two different views:

• A system of rights is intended to stop interference with people attempting to do various things. If A has a right to do X, then others are obliged not to interfere with A's doing X. This view understands rights as side constraints or non-interference rights.
  

• A system of rights is intended to maximize the number of people doing X or the amount of X being done. This view understands rights as a way of maximizing some result.

Whether observing rights (understood as side constraints) maximizes or minimizes any particular thing is an empirical question. The answer may easily be "no." In the case of speech, for example, a right to speak (understood as a side constraint) may or may not maximize the amount of speech or the number of speakers or the diversity of speakers. Dee tends to view rights and side constraints and Malik leans toward the maximization view. Our understanding is crucial to our view of the hate speech controversy.

Reference: Robert Nozick discusses rights as side constraints in Anarchy, State, and Utopia.