ABSTRACT
This chapter considers two forms of liberal universalism: utilitarianism and right-based theories. It discusses whether a theory of universal rights could provide a better account of duties to refugees. The chapter argues that these theories provided a better substantive conception of duties to refugees, thus meeting the criterion of normative desirability. The chapter discusses the notion of vulnerability seems to overcome the two central problems with the theories: the need for thresholds, and the problem of relying on subjective preferences. As with utilitarian theories, right-based universalist theories hold that the only morally relevant features of individuals are those which are common to human beings in general. Goodin attempts to avoid the problem of feasibility by arguing that there are instrumental or pragmatic grounds for dividing responsibility for protection, on the basis of an agent's relation to other individuals.
