This research examines the concept of human rights as universal rights. The concept of universality in relation to human rights implies that such rights are self-evident and that they exist in one form across cultures, regardless of whether they are recognized and practiced by all cultures (Machan, 1989). This conception of human rights is foundationalist in character and represents a rationalist interpretation of human rights. All countries, however, do not recognize the validity of this conception of human rights; thus, what is self-evident to one person is not necessarily self-evident to another. Actually, almost all countries do acknowledge the existence of human rights. The devil, as the old adage goes, is in the details, and the disagreements between countries and cultures in regards to human rights tend to focus on the specifics of human rightsùwhat they are and what they guarantee an individual. Based on the nature of the cross cultural discourse on human rights, the thesis of this research into the topic of "human rights as universal rights" is that: "An Absence of Political Consensus Across Cultures on Interpretation of the Term 'Human Rights' Renders the Concept of 'Universal Rights' Virtually Meaningless in the Contemporary Period." This thesis, thus, rejects the rationalist conception of human rights which is based on the philosophy of foundationalism.
While the principal focus of this examination is on the theories of rights, the examination is pursued from a political perspective. The findings of the examination of the topic "human rights as universal rights" are presented in three discussions. The first and major discussion reviews theories of rights, while the second discussion reviews international human rights treaties and declarations, along with varying interpretations of these instruments across cultures. The final discussion, the conclusion to the research, synthesizes the findings presented in the ...