In a paper that consists of 10 pages Bentham's contention that natural rights represent nothing more than rhetoric are examined in terms of his moral philosophy and references to how rights are defined legislatively as well as socially. Seven sources are cited in the bibliography.
Name of Research Paper File: JL5_JLbentham.rtf
Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
whether or not Benthams criticism of rights as nonsense on stilts is valid, it would be useful to consider not only whether Benthams perception of rights is accurate, but also
the way in which natural and legal rights are defined.
Bentham took an analytical view of the law, and of questions of morality and politics. He was particularly concerned with the concept of legal fictions, stating that
there were a number of terms which, although in common use, had over time lost their original meanings and were therefore to be regarded as inaccurate. These, he asserted, should
be eliminated from the law unless it could be proved that the abstract terms could be directly equated to their meaning in real life.
He applied the same analytical methodology to his consideration of morality, and hence to
elements of natural law and natural rights. He was of the opinion that morality and the law could be accounted for in scientific terms, but in order to do so
it was necessary to develop an account of human nature.
He considered that in the same way that nature could be analysed through the empirical laws of science, so the behaviour of human beings could be defined through the opposing
human motivations of pain and pleasure. He was aware that there was no way of proving that such a theory was correct, but at the same time maintained that all