PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
August 20, 2024European Journal of International Relations1 citationsOpen Access

A post-Hegelian theory of human rights: beyond recognition and the state

View Full Paper
DKDavid KarpUniversity of Sussex

Key Points

  • Human rights should be viewed as an independent field of action that transcends state structures, promoting agency within ethical life.
  • The analysis critiques traditional interpretations of Hegel's recognition theory, emphasizing pre-social recognition over state-defined interactions.
  • Developing a post-Hegelian critique highlights the importance of collective action in human rights, which is often overlooked in state-centric views of ethics and obligation.  Reshaping the understanding of human rights challenges Eurocentric perspectives, enabling a more inclusive global discourse.

Abstract

This article develops a post-Hegelian social and political theory of human rights. To do this, it moves past two legacies that can be traced back to Hegel’s philosophy: his theory of recognition and his views about the embeddedness of rights within states. IR often misinterprets Hegel’s recognition theory as applying within a public world of state action. However, Hegel argues that recognition occurs before rather than within a social world. Instead, I show how and why Hegel’s analysis of Sophocles’ play Antigone is a more fruitful starting point for theorising contemporary international practices. I mobilise a Hegelian social ontology of ‘ethical life’ and a post-Hegelian critique of statism and Eurocentrism to argue that human rights should be understood as an independent field of action in which agency is embedded, rather than as a practice that is tied to sovereignty and states. Several conclusions about the ontology and epistemology of human rights stem from this analysis. Human rights practice brings forms of action and obligation into being. It enables collective (not only individual) action. It requires the exercise of humility rather than hubris. Finally, it invites a discussion of how agents can bridge external and internal perspectives to evaluate the actions that seem to be required by their practices. This critical exploration and re-interpretation of Hegel’s early work corrects IR’s tendency to use his later and more statist writings to locate and concretise the grounds for ethics.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

David Karp (2024) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68e5b9bbb6db64358755277dhttps://doi.org/10.1177/13540661241271029
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper