Abstract
In the language of set theory, contractarianism and natural rights theories have a very large intersection but neither is a proper subset of the other. It might seem that the unanimity requirement of Buchanan’s contractarianism, the one being examined here, incorporates natural rights. After all, it is unanimity that distinguishes the social contract: no one is forced into it, and it is precisely the ban on initiating coercion that characterizes or is a principal conclusion of natural rights theories, and in particular that of Ayn Rand. The difference is chiefly one of emphasis: natural rights theory emphasizes bilateral exchange in the economy, while contractarianism emphasizes omnilateral exchange in the polity. At first blush, the two theories, except for emphasis, are identical.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1989 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Forman, F. (1989). Ayn Rand and Natural Rights. In: The Metaphysics of Liberty. Theory and Decision Library, vol 6. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-0901-4_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-0901-4_5
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-6894-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-0901-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive