ABSTRACT Mary Midgley asserts that my argument concerning the problem of child‐abuse was inappropriately framed in the language of rights, and neglected certain pertinent natural facts. I defend the view that the use of rights‐talk was both apposite and did not misrepresent the moral problem in question. I assess the status and character of the natural facts Midgley adduces in criticism of my case, concluding that they do not obviously establish the conclusions she believes they do. Finally I briefly respond to the charge that my suggestions were illiberal.
|Number of pages||6|
|Journal||Journal of Applied Philosophy|
|Publication status||Published - 01 Jan 1992|
ASJC Scopus subject areas