In many studies conducted in the past it has been observed that a spiritual philosophy of individual rights doesn’t seem to encounter the standard of comprehensiveness especially in a varied domain with several diverse principles in which not everyone understand this domain eventually expressive (Sen, 2005). Thus, a feasible earthly defence of these rights is likely together with being comprehensive as claimed by many theorists.
Similar to the Golden Rule or the Kantian categorical imperative, it has been argued in the study conducted by Alan Gerwirth that the standards of explanation for individual rights is founded on a higher ethical code which he calls as PGC or Principle of Generic Consistency. According to him, it is huge challenge to verify the human rights. He argues that it can’t be proved in any way possible that human beings are born with inherent human rights, even if they have rights since birth they are not empirically verifiable (Vizard, 2007).
In the modern world, the construct of human rights have attained some distinguished symbolic importance. In political terms, majority of the countries pass by the trick of demanding to honour a few kinds of these rights regardless of the fact that the same countries frequently disrupt the rights of its residents and in some cases not. Human rights in the past 50 years have become an important part of the international relations (Panikkar, 1982). This is because of the fact that there has been globalization of human rights discourses and concerns.