Abstract

Matthew Kramer’s theory of right-holding is a major contender in the debate about rights. Kramer proposes a version of the Interest Theory that amends the Basic Idea of the Interest Theory—that rights protect interests—by incorporating Bentham’s Test, an algorithm that identifies the party to whom an existing duty is owed. It is argued that Kramer’s methodological approach in devising Bentham’s Test as a tool to answer questions about right-holding leads into a dilemma: Either Kramer is left with no theory at all or with one that has alarmingly implausible implications. It is suggested that organizing conceptual investigations around a notion of normalcy may provide a way of avoiding both this unsatisfactory approach and the problems that affect other versions of the Interest Theory.