Issue 118 - Human Rights

[amity_blu]

Re:
1. Instead of just being continually 'vigilant', just fix and solve the 'problems' that you human beings keep causing and creating for "yourselves", then it is very simple and very easy to keep calm, with the sense of a True perspective.

1. Vigilance can be an awareness of hyper-vigilance and the dangers of it being all-consuming. In the previous context, it was about being overwhelmed in mental and social life by information overload. But still needing to know about the dangers of the risk of deception, misinformation by those with vested interests.

As social creatures, we rely on our background knowledge and skills of interpretation. The stories we tell ourselves and others.

It's about sieving out the dross to find the nuggets of what we think is true or helpful.
That can include high levels of activity, or not. It depends on allocation of time, energy and priorities.
It can cause high anxiety when bombarded by divisive, aggressive sets of us v them.
I think we have a disposition to be vigilant - part of a survival instinct.

Some choose to switch off. Some to remain ignorant or stuck in a safe pattern of thought.

What do you mean by 'the sense of True perspective' ?

2. Why only 'almost' all animals have rights? Why not all animals have rights?

2. The Primates - Samantha Neave visits a future where almost all animals have rights.
It's philosophical fiction. Did you read it? Who is the animal without rights?

[Age]

Re:
1. Instead of just being continually 'vigilant', just fix and solve the 'problems' that you human beings keep causing and creating for "yourselves", then it is very simple and very easy to keep calm, with the sense of a True perspective.

1. Vigilance can be an awareness of hyper-vigilance and the dangers of it being all-consuming. In the previous context, it was about being overwhelmed in mental and social life by information overload. But still needing to know about the dangers of the risk of deception, misinformation by those with vested interests.

As social creatures, we rely on our background knowledge and skills of interpretation. The stories we tell ourselves and others.

It's about sieving out the dross to find the nuggets of what we think is true or helpful.
That can include high levels of activity, or not. It depends on allocation of time, energy and priorities.
It can cause high anxiety when bombarded by divisive, aggressive sets of us v them.
I think we have a disposition to be vigilant - part of a survival instinct.

Some choose to switch off. Some to remain ignorant or stuck in a safe pattern of thought.

What do you mean by 'the sense of True perspective' ?

Not having your own personal perspective, and, having the One and only perspective.

2. Why only 'almost' all animals have rights? Why not all animals have rights?

2. The Primates - Samantha Neave visits a future where almost all animals have rights.
It's philosophical fiction. Did you read it? Who is the animal without rights?

Obviously the ones that are not in the list of, 'almost all animals'.

No, I did not read it. Did you read it?

If yes, then which animals did not make the list?

[Belinda]

Re:
1. Instead of just being continually 'vigilant', just fix and solve the 'problems' that you human beings keep causing and creating for "yourselves", then it is very simple and very easy to keep calm, with the sense of a True perspective.

1. Vigilance can be an awareness of hyper-vigilance and the dangers of it being all-consuming. In the previous context, it was about being overwhelmed in mental and social life by information overload. But still needing to know about the dangers of the risk of deception, misinformation by those with vested interests.

As social creatures, we rely on our background knowledge and skills of interpretation. The stories we tell ourselves and others.

It's about sieving out the dross to find the nuggets of what we think is true or helpful.
That can include high levels of activity, or not. It depends on allocation of time, energy and priorities.
It can cause high anxiety when bombarded by divisive, aggressive sets of us v them.
I think we have a disposition to be vigilant - part of a survival instinct.

Some choose to switch off. Some to remain ignorant or stuck in a safe pattern of thought.

What do you mean by 'the sense of True perspective' ?

2. Why only 'almost' all animals have rights? Why not all animals have rights?

2. The Primates - Samantha Neave visits a future where almost all animals have rights.
It's philosophical fiction. Did you read it? Who is the animal without rights?

The responsibility for answering who is the animal without rights rests with humanity.
My stance on this :-

*pathogenic bacteria have no rights, however we need to continually monitor their places in the general ecology.

* all humans have equal rights to life, thoughts, ideas, speech, assembly, and the basics of life including living wage.

*Animals other than human animals and bacteria have rights in ascending order mapped on to their various capabilities for happiness and suffering.

I welcome questions and objections from posters who care enough to read and reason.

[Age]

Bacteria that cause other animals much suffering are unlikely to be given rights. The sort of animals that are to be given rights are those animals that have developed central nervous systems.

Is 'this' a 'universal fact', or just what "belinda" personally believes, wants, desires, and/or hopes for?

Or, if 'this' is something else, then what is 'that', exactly?

Neaves does not explicitly point to the damage that we do to ourselves when we are apathetic about the suffering of other animals. But we do damage ourselves when we are so badly informed that we eat pigs who are at least as sentient and intelligent as our beloved dog.

And what test proved this claim, here, true?

I would damage myself if I had fun swimming with a dolphin who is captive in a tank, whilst I enjoyed the company of a much -loved dog at home.

[Age]

Re:
1. Instead of just being continually 'vigilant', just fix and solve the 'problems' that you human beings keep causing and creating for "yourselves", then it is very simple and very easy to keep calm, with the sense of a True perspective.

1. Vigilance can be an awareness of hyper-vigilance and the dangers of it being all-consuming. In the previous context, it was about being overwhelmed in mental and social life by information overload. But still needing to know about the dangers of the risk of deception, misinformation by those with vested interests.

As social creatures, we rely on our background knowledge and skills of interpretation. The stories we tell ourselves and others.

It's about sieving out the dross to find the nuggets of what we think is true or helpful.
That can include high levels of activity, or not. It depends on allocation of time, energy and priorities.
It can cause high anxiety when bombarded by divisive, aggressive sets of us v them.
I think we have a disposition to be vigilant - part of a survival instinct.

Some choose to switch off. Some to remain ignorant or stuck in a safe pattern of thought.

What do you mean by 'the sense of True perspective' ?

2. Why only 'almost' all animals have rights? Why not all animals have rights?

2. The Primates - Samantha Neave visits a future where almost all animals have rights.
It's philosophical fiction. Did you read it? Who is the animal without rights?

The responsibility for answering who is the animal without rights rests with humanity.
My stance on this :-

*pathogenic bacteria have no rights, however we need to continually monitor their places in the general ecology.

* all humans have equal rights to life, thoughts, ideas, speech, assembly, and the basics of life including living wage.

*Animals other than human animals and bacteria have rights in ascending order mapped on to their various capabilities for happiness and suffering.

I welcome questions and objections from posters who care enough to read and reason.

How does one judge the capabilities of happiness and suffering in non human animals.

Also, does what you say and claim, here, mean people like "gary childress", for example, who has less capability for happiness and more capability for suffering mean that 'we' could extend, or lessen, 'rights' within the human being species, itself, as well?

[amity_blu]

Previously:
AB: Vigilance can be an awareness of hyper-vigilance and the dangers of it being all-consuming. In the previous context, it was about being overwhelmed in mental and social life by information overload. But still needing to know about the dangers of the risk of deception, misinformation by those with vested interests.

As social creatures, we rely on our background knowledge and skills of interpretation. The stories we tell ourselves and others.

It's about sieving out the dross to find the nuggets of what we think is true or helpful.
That can include high levels of activity, or not. It depends on allocation of time, energy and priorities.
It can cause high anxiety when bombarded by divisive, aggressive sets of us v them.
I think we have a disposition to be vigilant - part of a survival instinct.

Age:
Instead of just being continually 'vigilant', just fix and solve the 'problems' that you human beings keep causing and creating for "yourselves", then it is very simple and very easy to keep calm, with the sense of a True perspective

AB: What do you mean by 'the sense of True perspective' ?

Age: Not having your own personal perspective, and, having the One and only perspective.



***
It is impossible not to have a personal perspective. It is primarily from our thinking self, brain and senses that we observe and assess life situations, interactions and implications. Knowledge and understanding are shared by contact with others. Individual problems and issues are not always simple. A calm passivity is not always the solution. Sometimes, often, defensive action is required when under attack, physically, mentally or psychologically.

What is the One and only True perspective?

***
AB: The Primates - Samantha Neave visits a future where almost all animals have rights.
It's philosophical fiction. Did you read it? Who is the animal without rights?

Age: Obviously the ones that are not in the list of, 'almost all animals'.
No, I did not read it. Did you read it?
If yes, then which animals did not make the list?

You need to read the story and pay attention. That is, if you are really interested. I enjoyed it.

[Age]

Previously:
AB: Vigilance can be an awareness of hyper-vigilance and the dangers of it being all-consuming. In the previous context, it was about being overwhelmed in mental and social life by information overload. But still needing to know about the dangers of the risk of deception, misinformation by those with vested interests.

As social creatures, we rely on our background knowledge and skills of interpretation. The stories we tell ourselves and others.

It's about sieving out the dross to find the nuggets of what we think is true or helpful.
That can include high levels of activity, or not. It depends on allocation of time, energy and priorities.
It can cause high anxiety when bombarded by divisive, aggressive sets of us v them.
I think we have a disposition to be vigilant - part of a survival instinct.

Age:
Instead of just being continually 'vigilant', just fix and solve the 'problems' that you human beings keep causing and creating for "yourselves", then it is very simple and very easy to keep calm, with the sense of a True perspective

AB: What do you mean by 'the sense of True perspective' ?

Age: Not having your own personal perspective, and, having the One and only perspective.



***
It is impossible not to have a personal perspective.

Is 'this' your own personal perspective, or the One and only perspective?

If it is the former, then can your own personal perspectives ever be Wrong?

It is primarily from our thinking self, brain and senses that we observe and assess life situations, interactions and implications. Knowledge and understanding are shared by contact with others. Individual problems and issues are not always simple. A calm passivity is not always the solution. Sometimes, often, defensive action is required when under attack, physically, mentally or psychologically.

Can you not remain calm when being defensive?

If no, then why not?

What is the One and only True perspective?

The One every one shares, equally, together, as One.

***
The Primates - Samantha Neave visits a future where almost all animals have rights.
It's philosophical fiction. Did you read it? Who is the animal without rights?

Age: Obviously the ones that are not in the list of, 'almost all animals'.
No, I did not read it. Did you read it?
If yes, then which animals did not make the list?

You need to read the story and pay attention. That is, if you are really interested. I enjoyed it.

Well considering that you will just not list the animals that 'did not make the cut', as some might say, here, you are not inspiring any interest, at all, here.

[amity_blu]

Age: Why only 'almost' all animals have rights? Why not all animals have rights?
AB: The Primates - Samantha Neave visits a future where almost all animals have rights.
It's philosophical fiction. Did you read it? Who is the animal without rights?

***

The responsibility for answering who is the animal without rights rests with humanity.
My stance on this :-

*pathogenic bacteria have no rights, however we need to continually monitor their places in the general ecology.

* all humans have equal rights to life, thoughts, ideas, speech, assembly, and the basics of life including living wage.

*Animals other than human animals and bacteria have rights in ascending order mapped on to their various capabilities for happiness and suffering.

I welcome questions and objections from posters who care enough to read and reason.

Thank you, Belinda, for offering your views on animal rights.
This is a serious, moral topic which the story highlights in a fictional, futuristic laboratory setting.

I presume it was the editor who made the introduction with the cute 'hook':
'Samantha Neave visits a future where almost all animals have rights'.

The tale has an interesting twist.

[amity_blu]

From Age: Well considering that you will just not list the animals that 'did not make the cut', as some might say, here, you are not inspiring any interest, at all, here.


A distraction from your self, projecting blame for own lack of motivation to an other.
Thanks for previous. I'm now leaving the discussion.

PS There is no list. The answer to your question is found in the story. To spell it out would spoil it.
The link again: https://philosophynow.org/issues/170/The_Primates

[Belinda]

Re:
1. Instead of just being continually 'vigilant', just fix and solve the 'problems' that you human beings keep causing and creating for "yourselves", then it is very simple and very easy to keep calm, with the sense of a True perspective.

1. Vigilance can be an awareness of hyper-vigilance and the dangers of it being all-consuming. In the previous context, it was about being overwhelmed in mental and social life by information overload. But still needing to know about the dangers of the risk of deception, misinformation by those with vested interests.

As social creatures, we rely on our background knowledge and skills of interpretation. The stories we tell ourselves and others.

It's about sieving out the dross to find the nuggets of what we think is true or helpful.
That can include high levels of activity, or not. It depends on allocation of time, energy and priorities.
It can cause high anxiety when bombarded by divisive, aggressive sets of us v them.
I think we have a disposition to be vigilant - part of a survival instinct.

Some choose to switch off. Some to remain ignorant or stuck in a safe pattern of thought.

What do you mean by 'the sense of True perspective' ?

2. Why only 'almost' all animals have rights? Why not all animals have rights?

2. The Primates - Samantha Neave visits a future where almost all animals have rights.
It's philosophical fiction. Did you read it? Who is the animal without rights?

The responsibility for answering who is the animal without rights rests with humanity.
My stance on this :-

*pathogenic bacteria have no rights, however we need to continually monitor their places in the general ecology.

* all humans have equal rights to life, thoughts, ideas, speech, assembly, and the basics of life including living wage.

*Animals other than human animals and bacteria have rights in ascending order mapped on to their various capabilities for happiness and suffering.

I welcome questions and objections from posters who care enough to read and reason.

How does one judge the capabilities of happiness and suffering in non human animals.

Also, does what you say and claim, here, mean people like "gary childress", for example, who has less capability for happiness and more capability for suffering mean that 'we' could extend, or lessen, 'rights' within the human being species, itself, as well?

Sharp question Age. All humans must be given equal rights. We have learned through bitter experience the evil of believing some humans to be sub-human .

One judges the capabilities of happiness and suffering in non human animals by objective observations.

*Their body language, tears, and so forth.

* Observing abnormal behaviours such as pacing, panics, sores, lameness, and physical exhaustion.

* knowing what is natural behaviour for that species, and judging whether or not the animal's environment provides scope for natural behaviours.

[Age]

The responsibility for answering who is the animal without rights rests with humanity.
My stance on this :-

*pathogenic bacteria have no rights, however we need to continually monitor their places in the general ecology.

* all humans have equal rights to life, thoughts, ideas, speech, assembly, and the basics of life including living wage.

*Animals other than human animals and bacteria have rights in ascending order mapped on to their various capabilities for happiness and suffering.

I welcome questions and objections from posters who care enough to read and reason.

How does one judge the capabilities of happiness and suffering in non human animals.

Also, does what you say and claim, here, mean people like "gary childress", for example, who has less capability for happiness and more capability for suffering mean that 'we' could extend, or lessen, 'rights' within the human being species, itself, as well?

Sharp question Age. All humans must be given equal rights. We have learned through bitter experience the evil of believing some humans to be sub-human .

One judges the capabilities of happiness and suffering in non human animals by objective observations.

And who are 'these ones' who make actual 'objective observations' and who thus do not make 'subjective observations', at all?

*Their body language, tears, and so forth.

* Observing abnormal behaviours such as pacing, panics, sores, lameness, and physical exhaustion.

* knowing what is natural behaviour for that species, and judging whether or not the animal's environment provides scope for natural behaviours.

Is there any thing wrong with just giving all animals the exact same 'rights' as you human animals?

It would make living so much easier and simple if all animals were given the 'same rights', equally.

[Belinda]

How does one judge the capabilities of happiness and suffering in non human animals.

Also, does what you say and claim, here, mean people like "gary childress", for example, who has less capability for happiness and more capability for suffering mean that 'we' could extend, or lessen, 'rights' within the human being species, itself, as well?

Sharp question Age. All humans must be given equal rights. We have learned through bitter experience the evil of believing some humans to be sub-human .

One judges the capabilities of happiness and suffering in non human animals by objective observations.

And who are 'these ones' who make actual 'objective observations' and who thus do not make 'subjective observations', at all?

*Their body language, tears, and so forth.

* Observing abnormal behaviours such as pacing, panics, sores, lameness, and physical exhaustion.

* knowing what is natural behaviour for that species, and judging whether or not the animal's environment provides scope for natural behaviours.

Is there any thing wrong with just giving all animals the exact same 'rights' as you human animals?

It would make living so much easier and simple if all animals were given the 'same rights', equally.

Problem is that people think they have either a God-given right or a natural right to eat other animals. In fact eating other animals is an example of might makes right.

[Impenitent]

Thrasymachus was here

we haven't agreed on a universal human language, let alone rights... to say nothing of duty

-Imp

[Age]

Sharp question Age. All humans must be given equal rights. We have learned through bitter experience the evil of believing some humans to be sub-human .

One judges the capabilities of happiness and suffering in non human animals by objective observations.

And who are 'these ones' who make actual 'objective observations' and who thus do not make 'subjective observations', at all?

*Their body language, tears, and so forth.

* Observing abnormal behaviours such as pacing, panics, sores, lameness, and physical exhaustion.

* knowing what is natural behaviour for that species, and judging whether or not the animal's environment provides scope for natural behaviours.

Is there any thing wrong with just giving all animals the exact same 'rights' as you human animals?

It would make living so much easier and simple if all animals were given the 'same rights', equally.

Problem is that people think they have either a God-given right or a natural right to eat other animals. In fact eating other animals is an example of might makes right.

So, do you know why you think this?

If yes, then why do you think this?

But, if no, then why have you not yet worked out why you think the way you do, here?

[Age]

Thrasymachus was here

we haven't agreed on a universal human language, let alone rights... to say nothing of duty

-Imp

How come you.and some others have not?