Re: Basic Human Rights
Posted: Mon Apr 26, 2021 1:28 am
For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
Your objections are not relevant.Immanuel Can wrote: βSun Apr 25, 2021 7:52 pmPlease do.
That is indeed a story that deserves to start with "once upon a time." And like all fairy tales, it should end with, "and they lived happily ever after."Once upon a time there were no rights.
Kings decided that they had the right to rule, but other people got the idea that others might be able to have rights too.
There was much struggle.
And in the places that such struggles were successful people acquired rights.
Then the UN write the UDHR this gave anyone on earth the chance to pressure their governments, and for signoatories to pressure other countries.
If you are luckly enough to live in a signatory state, you have legal redress to maintain the rights listed. If you do not then you have to pressure your government to sign up.
But your story has massive holes in it, such as the first mention of "rights," and how it was ever conceived, and on what basis it was legitimized, and why people came to believe in them, and from where the UN got them...and why we ought to believe in them now. And that's just a start.
What kind of sanctions do you recommend?
The need for sanctions, or enforcement, of any kind underscores the fact that so called rights are nothing more than power plays conducted in such a way as to afford so called rights to the one with the most power. Itβs power, not rights.
Yes, of course, and the reason for my question. I really would like to know what Sculptor's answer would be.commonsense wrote: βMon Apr 26, 2021 3:05 pmThe need for sanctions, or enforcement, of any kind underscores the fact that so called rights are nothing more than power plays conducted in such a way as to afford so called rights to the one with the most power. Itβs power, not rights.
No the details of the history are just details.Immanuel Can wrote: βMon Apr 26, 2021 12:42 pmThe origin and definition of the term are just "details"?![]()
And you can still fuck offRCSaunders wrote: βMon Apr 26, 2021 2:54 pmSo this is how one who believes in rights deals with anyone who disagrees with them. Good to know.
Please refer to the post I made some moments ago.
Ah...history is just another "detail."
I wonder if you ever have anything of significance to say.Immanuel Can wrote: βTue Apr 27, 2021 1:20 pmAh...history is just another "detail."Sculptor wrote: βTue Apr 27, 2021 9:50 amNo the details of the history are just details.Immanuel Can wrote: βMon Apr 26, 2021 12:42 pm
The origin and definition of the term are just "details"?![]()
![]()
I wonder if there are any contrary facts you don't merely relegate to the "detail" ashcan.
Perhaps you should not have been so sillyRCSaunders wrote: βMon Apr 26, 2021 3:36 pmYes, of course, and the reason for my question. I really would like to know what Sculptor's answer would be.commonsense wrote: βMon Apr 26, 2021 3:05 pmThe need for sanctions, or enforcement, of any kind underscores the fact that so called rights are nothing more than power plays conducted in such a way as to afford so called rights to the one with the most power. Itβs power, not rights.
Indeed. But from the resistence I have had with this idea you would think it was rocket science.Lacewing wrote: βSun Apr 25, 2021 5:09 pmI agree. Humans are making up all sorts of things... and then forgetting (maybe), and thinking it existed before (or independently of) themselves.RCSaunders wrote: βSun Apr 25, 2021 4:51 pmThat's right.Sculptor wrote: βSun Apr 25, 2021 3:29 pm I think what RC is saying is that like "laws, customs, rites and norms," rights are just things made up by particular societies. Consequently, they are just as changeable, ignorable and eliminable as the former. I don't think he's claiming they don't exist as fictions...just that they are fictions.
It's not that making-up stuff is bad -- it's just that we have more options when we realize we're making it up, and that it's not cast in stone.
Well, I would say that you don't know what rights are...and I would say the gap in your (historical, conceptual and etymological) understanding and your readiness to consider data is "significant."