Deontologists believe that it is wrong to violate a right even if this will prevent a greater number of violations of the same right. This leads to the paradox of deontology: If respecting everyone's rights is equally important, why should we not minimize the number of rights violations? One possible answer is agent-based. This answer points out that you should not violate rights even if this will prevent someone else's violations. In this paper, I defend a relational agent-based justification that focuses on the relation in which the agent stands to her would-be victims. I argue that this justification can avoid two key objections levelled against agent-based justifications: It can explain why we are not permitted to minimize our own rights violations, and the justification avoids the charge of being excessively self-concerned.

中文翻译：

---

约束、你和你的受害者

义务论者认为，侵犯一项权利是错误的，即使这可以防止更多的侵犯同一权利的行为。这就导致了义务论的悖论：如果尊重每个人的权利同样重要，为什么我们不应该尽量减少侵犯权利的次数呢？一种可能的答案是基于代理。该答案指出，即使这可以防止其他人侵犯权利，您也不应该侵犯权利。在本文中，我捍卫了一种基于关系主体的论证，该论证重点关注主体与其潜在受害者之间的关系。我认为，这种理由可以避免针对基于主体的理由提出的两个关键反对意见：它可以解释为什么我们不被允许最大限度地减少我们自己的权利侵犯，并且这种理由避免了过度自私的指控。