ABSTRACT
The other two rights mentioned by Thomson have a different logical structure.8 In both these instances, the alleged right is a right with respect to a thing (one’s “own body,” or the state of affairs referred to as one’s “life”). Here the relation is two-term: between one person and some thing or state of affairs. Rights in this sense cannot be com pletely analyzed in terms of some unique combination of Hohfeldian rights.9 P’s right to a thing (land, body, life) can and normally should be secured by granting or attributing Hohfeldian rights to him or to others; but just which combination of such Hohfeldian rights will properly or best secure his single right to the thing in question will vary according to time, place, person and circumstance. And since moral judgments centrally concern actions, it is this specification of Hohfeldian rights that we need for moral purposes, rather than in vocations of rights to things.
