These are working papers, and copyright William Thomas. I appreciate any comments you may have regarding them. All the papers below are in MS-Word format, zip-compressed. A selection of my book reviews, cultural commentaries, FAQ answers, and other essays can be found in the Objectivist Center's Ideas and Issues Web Library. Just search there for my work by picking my name from the list of authors.
The Foundations of Criminal Child Welfare Law in a Rights-Based Political SystemAbstract: Thomas argues that legal obligations of parents towards their infant children and criminal protections of infants against abuse are justified within a system of law where all claims derive from the protection of the rights of individual adults to liberty. Given Rand's Objectivist argument for rights, infants cannot have rights in the most basic sense. However, the right of adult children to bring (tort) claims against neglectful parents or abusive adults provides the justification for criminal protections of children. The positive obligations parents bear toward their infant children are meaningfully analogous to positive obligations toward (adult) victims of willful harm. The creation of an independently viable infant is taken as the starting point of parental obligation; thus abortion rights are conserved. It results that it is both just and in the interest of adult citizens to enact minimal but significant protections of child welfare.
Rights, Egoism, and the Trader Principle
Prepared for the 1996 IOS Summer Seminar.
Abstract: Ayn Rand's approach to rights is derived from her argument for the Trader Principle as the core social principle of her ethics. This argument, as it appears in the writings of Rand and Leonard Peikoff, is quite abstract, and has neither been well understood by scholars nor expounded with an attention to detail. While not exegetical, this essay provides a more detailed justification of the complex view of social ethics that underlies the Trader Principle. Rights-respecting behavior is argued to be strictly in the self-interest of any person. The utility of force is different contexts is discussed and physical harm is distinguished from emotional and economic harm on fundamental grounds. The revocation of the rights of criminals, and the partial rights of incompetents and children are considered, as are some possible criticisms.
Back to Will Thomas' homepage.