Right Against High Risk Impositions

Abstract

We have many facts of permissibility and impermissibility. A particularly interesting subclass of these facts are facts of permissibility and impermissibility of risk impositions. We normally think that some actions are too risky to be permissible, if taking into account their gravity of harm and their size of risk. In contrast, other actions, even if they impose risks of harm on others, are permissible. Some risks present too low a probability of harm to any given people so that it would be unnecessarily stringent to ban them by negative rights . But some risky actions are themselves prohibited by negative rights . In this paper, I defend High Risk Thesis, which claims that we have rights against high-risk impositions. I am going to provide two reasons for accepting High Risk Thesis. First, I will show that the reasons for preferring Risk Thesis to High Risk Thesis are unsound. And I will argue that High Risk Thesis can avoid the proliferation of rights infringements.