ABSTRACT Title of Dissertation: BEING HUMAN, BEING GOOD: THE SOURCE AND SUMMIT OF UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS Janet Holl Madigan, Doctor of Philosophy, 2004 Dissertation Directed By: Professor Charles E. Butterworth Department of Government and Politics This dissertation uses the concept of universal human rights to explore the relationship between the individual, society and truth. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, written in the wake of World War II, was meant to provide a moral standard for judging the state’s treatment of the individual. Yet to this day some contend that the principles expressed therein are not universal, but culturally relative. The dominant arguments for universality, however, are themselves relativistic because they are not grounded in the idea of a natural order that supplies objective standards of value. The result is not a morally neutral explanation of human dignity, but a new moral philosophy altogether, that upholds personal autonomy as its highest good. But this position ultimately undermines human rights, for it entails that what is understood to be human is not fixed, but determined by the most powerful elements of society. How did we arrive at this point of wishing to say something universally true about human beings even while lacking the philosophical means to do so coherently? To answer this, I explore the changing relationship between truth and politics from Plato to Locke. Plato and Aristotle saw truth as essential to the proper ordering of individual and political life. Christianity concurred, but held that knowing truth was no longer the sole province of philosophers. Machiavelli rejected transcendent standards as inadequate for politics. Modern political philosophy actually begins with Grotius, who, in reaction to Machiavelli’s political realism, constructs a natural law philosophy divorced from the idea of objective good. This leads inevitably to Locke’s non-theistic natural law and the elevation of human will to the level of the sacred, thus resulting in the current crisis of understanding in universal human rights. The only logical ground for the concept of universal human rights is Thomistic natural law. An investigation of Aquinas’s notion of being and goodness reveals that the only truly universal human rights are to life and free will. Applying this principle yields the conclusion that if human rights are to have any meaning whatsoever, there can never be a “human right” to abortion. BEING HUMAN, BEING GOOD: THE SOURCE AND SUMMIT OF UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS by Janet Holl Madigan Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland, College Park, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2004 Advisory Committee: Professor Charles E. Butterworth, Chair Professor Herman Belz Professor Mark A. Graber Professor Don C. Piper Professor Gordon Schochet © Copyright by Janet Holl Madigan 2004 Dedication To my sons, David, Joseph, Dominic, and Andrew Fight the good fight; finish the race; keep the faith. (2 Tm 4:6.) ii Acknowledgments This work, seven years in the making, owes its completion to the many people who have provided help along the way. It would be difficult to overstate my debt of gratitude to Charles Butterworth. Writing a dissertation is daunting enough; doing so in a non-academic setting while raising small children would have been impossible were it not for his personal attention to my progress and well being. Possessing an unwavering commitment to the cultivation of intellectual virtue that is complemented by great kindness and unfailing good humor, he is the kind of scholar and teacher I hope to be. Aristotle once said that it is not possible to have many friends in the fullest sense of the word, who love what is truly good and sincerely wish this for another. I am very fortunate to count Charles Butterworth as one of my true friends. Gordon Schochet has also been indispensable to my education. He is that rare academic whose passion for ideas never detracts from his utter devotion to the welfare of his students. Moreover, he is truly the consummate liberal, which is to say, genuinely open-minded to any well-constructed argument, regardless of whether or not he is in agreement. Don Piper sparked my interest in the moral aspect of international relations, and was ever ready to extend a helping hand. I am grateful to Herman Belz for his encouragement and astute suggestions. From Mark Graber I learned that it is possible to balance dedication to one’s family with the pursuit of one’s studies, with favorable outcomes to both. I credit Benjamin Barber with igniting my love for political philosophy in the first place. The passion with which he approaches his discipline is nothing short of infectious. Along with Gordon Schochet, he was iii instrumental in setting me on the path to graduate education. Furthermore, I am grateful to the Earhart Foundation for its generous support during the early phase of writing. I would also like to acknowledge the friends and family members who have accompanied me on this journey. As with anything else I have achieved in my life, I credit my parents, Albert and Jane Holl, and their unflagging love, guidance and support. My father diligently read every word, and was an eager sounding board for my ideas. I thank my brothers and sisters for their love and friendship. I am particularly grateful to my sisters, Laura Riccardi and Susan Koval. Laura, herself a busy mother of four, provided critical moral support during the difficult moments when finishing seemed a far too distant goal. Susan, always encouraging, also devoted a week of her time to caring for my four active little boys during a crucial phase of writing. In addition, she and her husband, Adam Koval, provided much- appreciated technical support. This project is to no small degree the fruit of many discussions I have had over the years with another true friend, Fr. Joseph Barranger, O.P. His fount of wisdom has been an invaluable source of inspiration for both this dissertation and life in general. It should be noted that this work would never have been completed were it not for the love and support of my “friend of friends,” my husband Dave, and his devotion to our four children. On weekend mornings too numerous to count, he took complete charge of the boys while I retreated to the relative tranquility of the study to write. It sounds cliche, but is nevertheless true: As with everything else in marriage, this accomplishment is as much his as it is mine. I would also like to thank my sons, iv David, Joseph, Dominic and Andrew, for helping me to put it all into perspective. Finally, it goes without saying, but should be said anyway, that I gratefully acknowledge the One who alone deserves credit for whatever is true or good in this work: Deo Gratias! v Table of Contents Dedication.....................................................................................................................ii Acknowledgments........................................................................................................iii Introduction................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1: Universal Human Rights and the Impoverishment of Moral Discourse ... 9 The History of Human Rights in International Law ............................................... 11 The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Taking Conscience for a Guide...... 16 Cultural Relativism: The Argument and its Critique .............................................. 24 Rights in Non-Western Perspectives....................................................................... 28 The Arguments For Universality ............................................................................ 35 The Autonomy View........................................................................................ 35 Autonomy and Community.............................................................................. 50 Liberalism and Relativism: Not-so-Strange Bedfellows.................................. 58 Sentiment as Foundation.................................................................................. 63 Evolution and Human Rights ........................................................................... 68 Human Rights as Moral Principles ......................................................................... 74 Are Rights Really Universal? ................................................................................. 90 Chapter 2: Soul Keeping and State Building: Principles and Politics from Plato to Machiavelli.................................................................................................................. 93 Natural Right: The “Philosophic Quest for the First Things” in Plato and Aristotle ................................................................................................................................. 95 Plato’s Republic: The Best Regime ................................................................. 97 The Laws: The Second Best Regime ............................................................. 106 Artistotle and Human Happiness: The Perfect and the Possible.................... 112 The Philosophic First Things in the Light of Christianity .................................... 124 The City of God and the City of Man............................................................ 132 St. Thomas: From Natural Right to Natural Law..........................................