检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:黄金荣[1]
机构地区:[1]中国社会科学院法学研究所,副研究员北京100720
出 处:《浙江社会科学》2018年第10期24-35,共12页Zhejiang Social Sciences
基 金:国家社科基金重大项目"社会主义核心价值观的司法贯彻机制研究"(批准号:17VHJ008)的阶段性成果
摘 要:自1948年《世界人权宣言》通过以来,人权体系的不断膨胀趋势给传统的人权概念带来了很大的挑战。不同的人权理论对于这种趋势采取了不同的回应方式,自然人权论试图通过严格界定传统人权概念剔除国际人权体系中不合格的人权,而政治人权论则试图从国际政治功能的角度重新界定人权的概念。但无论是理想主义的自然人权论还是现实主义的政治人权论,其提出的人权概念和标准都存在一定的缺陷。为了使人权概念对现实更具包容性和解释力,有必要将人权界定为个人和特定人群基于人的尊严而应享有的、主要旨在限制国家权力的权利。The increasingly inflating human rights list has posed a big challenge to the traditional concept of human rights since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted by UN in 1948. Different theories of human rights take different approaches to this challenge. While the naturalistic conception of human rights attempts to exclude those unqualified human rights by defining the traditional concept of human rights more narrowly, the political conception of human rights has tried to redefine the concept of human rights from the perspective of political function of international human rights. Both the concepts and standards of human rights advocated by the idealistic naturalistic conception of human rights and the realistic political conception of human rights are flawed in some respects. In order to have a more inclusive concept of human rights reflecting the true reality, it is advisable to define the concept of human rights as the rights that individuals and specific groups shall enjoy for the protection of the dignity of human being mainly with a view to limiting the state power.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:18.224.33.235