ABSTRACT
This chapter discusses the conflicts of rights. It argues whether, in our moral thinking, we should regard rights as considerations that are capable of conflicting with one another, and, if they are to be thought of in this way, how such conflicts should be resolved. However, the chapter argues that as follows: first, that if rights are understood along the lines of the Interest Theory proposed by Joseph Raz, then conflicts of rights must be regarded as more or less inevitable. Second, those rights on this conception should be thought of, not as correlative to single duties, but as generating a multiplicity of duties. And third, that multiplicity stands in the way of any tidy or single-minded account of the way in which the resolution of rights conflicts should be approached. Many philosophers are reluctant to admit claims to the realm of rights if they seem likely to conflict with one another.
