Bryan Turner's Theory Of Human Rights

Introduction
Sociology
Bryan Turner
Bryan Turner contributed a lot of time familiarising himself with Durkheim, Weber and Marx’s view on rights. In Turner’s opinion Durkheim’s view did not satisfy the rights of individuals and was based more on social cohesion, Weber’s view allowed one to see passed the rights of just the state and Marx’s view was based off of the economic system. Turner found that Marx’s views were too influenced; this is because Turner believed that human rights should not be viewed exclusively from an individualist. The criticism, from Turner, on Weber’s view was partial based on Strauss’ criticism that Weber attacked the idea of natural rights. The two concepts that Strauss’ believed were attacked were the “conventionalism”

He supports the idea that human rights are a result of society. This is because he viewed human rights claims and institutions as being “unique”. He argues that human rights in an institution specific to particular culture and historic context and is in fact a human construction. Waters does not believe that all human rights do not involve all made against the state. Human rights can only include claims that are recognised as fundamental to a political community’s member’s humanity in Waters’ opinion. In short, Waters says that specific rights will be granted dependent on specific historical conditions. According to Waters, human rights are a product of particular balances of political interests. He emphasises the distinct difference between human rights discourse and human rights institutions. Human rights were made to benefit the bourgeois class, in his opinion. Since Waters viewed human rights claims and institutions as being “unique”, he believes that it is impossible to explain the point of origin. Waters believed that the production and use of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are a result of the following

Sjoberg believes that human rights were put in place to protect individuals against the abuses of corporate power. He was aware of the debate with regards to the origin of human rights but viewed it as a socially and historically produced phenomenon. Sjoberg sees human rights as unconditional and should not be dependent on one fulfilling one’s duties, although he does see on fulfilling one’s duties as a secondary concern. The following moral frameworks were discussed by Sjoberg, namely the supposed value neutrality (of positivism), utilitarianism, nation-state morality, and cultural relativism. In turn, Sjoberg believed that human rights were the best approach to address the abuse of bureaucratic organizations. This belief supported Weber’s view on human rights; Weber implied that there was a relationship between bureaucracies and rights. The features of Sjoberg’s theory of human rights included focusing on the bureaucracy and the role of human agency in relation to it. Unlike Weber, Sjoberg went further into the topic and includes the inequality that occurs with individuals higher up in the hierarchy. From Sjoberg and his colleagues’ studies it was proposed that individuals are capable