ABSTRACT
Hägerström is practically admitting that the attempt to elucidate 'X has a right to R' as if it described a set of facts, fails to explain its meaning at least in some of the contexts in which it is ordinarily used. But he is surely wrong to conclude on that account that it describes something magical, that enters the world of reality only when it induces people to act in particular ways because they subscribe to the illusion. Hägerström's search for alternative forms of expression that will describe the same set of facts as 'X has a right to R' is mistaken precisely because it does not describe facts at all; and the problem arises only because of a failure to distinguish normative and descriptive discourse.
