View Poll Results: Do You Believe in Natural Rights?

Voters
87. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    36 41.38%
  • No

    51 58.62%
Page 8 of 100 FirstFirst ... 6789101858 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 994

Thread: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

  1. #71
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-17-16 @ 04:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,122

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Perhaps. Yet without ideals or goals, we are nothing more than savages are we not?
    Good ideals and goals are good, bad ones can be used to justify savagery.

  2. #72
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    42,446

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard Truth View Post
    Good ideals and goals are good, bad ones can be used to justify savagery.


    Perhaps. It would be hard to argue against the concept of natural rights as a collective good, though, given that they spring from the very needs and character of the human condition, and are things virtually all of us want.

    And as I've argued before.... even if you believe they ARE a social construct, are those rights more secure if the general populace believes them "Natural Law" or ordained by God... or if everyone just says "oh well they're just social constructs..." (and therefore subject to change or discarding...)


    I'd prefer they be viewed as sacrosanct in some manner... seems more secure to me.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  3. #73
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Texas, Vegas, Colombia
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 05:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,295

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    I'm all about unenumerated rights.
    most of us are... most of us are all about enumerated rights as well.... though i'm curious, how do you know if you have a right to something or some action if it's not on a list for you?...if you aren't specifically told you have the right to do something by your community, society, or government, what would leave you to believe you have that right?



    I don't think rights have anything to do with feeling entitled to things. Plenty of people feel entitled to things that society doesn't determine people should have a right to. And it certainly takes external force to ensure that you aren't prevented from speaking your mind. I would call that community and society rather than authority. I don't think that rights are handed down from above, but are secured by a people. That takes a group. The only time when you can really claim rights without group consensus is if you are completely alone.
    umm.. rights are principles of freedom or entitlement.... so i don't know how to address this with you when you utterly deny even the most basic of definitions.



    It seems rather egocentric to suggest that every past society had these rights but they were being violated constantly, and that future societies won't have rights that we've never dreamed of. It also suggests that we are progressing towards some perfect society that was predetermined by nature, rather than improving upon and replacing flawed human constructs. Neither of those ideas seem at all reasonable.
    yeah.. denying rights exist and have no basis in reality or human nature is much more reasonable.



    Again, rights are not about feelings. Rights are about not stopping people from doing things or empowering people to do things.
    nevermind.. you obviously don't understand when i say " feel".. nor do you want to.

    Ultimately, if nature granted us rights, they would apply in circumstances besides just human interaction. A hungry lion is never going to respect your right to life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness. But other people will. People create rights. Each society creates its own rights.
    wow, that was compelling... natural rights don't exist because animals don't respect them.
    rights are all about human interactions.... not interactions with the animal kingdom...

  4. #74
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 03:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrilla View Post
    most of us are... most of us are all about enumerated rights as well.... though i'm curious, how do you know if you have a right to something or some action if it's not on a list for you?...if you aren't specifically told you have the right to do something by your community, society, or government, what would leave you to believe you have that right?
    Because in this country, you have every possible right unless there's a constitutionally sound reason to restrict it. That's what the ninth amendment is for.

    umm.. rights are principles of freedom or entitlement.... so i don't know how to address this with you when you utterly deny even the most basic of definitions.
    You're not talking about principles. You're talking about feeling entitled. I think you ought to refine your definitions.

    yeah.. denying rights exist and have no basis in reality or human nature is much more reasonable.
    Of course rights exist. We're talking about whether or not they're a human construct or if they're intrinsic to nature. You are asserting the latter while I am demonstrating good reason why it's the former.

    nevermind.. you obviously don't understand when i say " feel".. nor do you want to.
    You should try to be more clear when you speak then, so people can understand you.

    wow, that was compelling... natural rights don't exist because animals don't respect them.
    rights are all about human interactions.... not interactions with the animal kingdom...
    Yes, they are about human interaction. They are therefore a creation of humans.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Perhaps. It would be hard to argue against the concept of natural rights as a collective good, though, given that they spring from the very needs and character of the human condition, and are things virtually all of us want.

    I will argue that. The concept of natural rights is an incredibly imprecise method for determining what should be protected. There is no way to demonstrate nature's stance on anything to do with rights.


    And as I've argued before.... even if you believe they ARE a social construct, are those rights more secure if the general populace believes them "Natural Law" or ordained by God... or if everyone just says "oh well they're just social constructs..." (and therefore subject to change or discarding...)

    Wrong. They're not "just" social constructs. We create them, and we can improve them. They aren't handed down by anyone, and so they aren't static. Leaving rights up to a god would mean that we'd still have slavery. In 1789, the concept of natural rights meant that we had rights that kings couldn't take away. In 2015, it's just an excuse to say that everything was perfect in 1789 and we shouldn't progress beyond that.


    I'd prefer they be viewed as sacrosanct in some manner... seems more secure to me.

    They should be viewed as extremely flimsy and easily disposed of. That obliges us to continually act to protect them and not allow ourselves to get complacent. Complacency about our rights has lead us to allow incredible injustices.
    Last edited by Paschendale; 05-16-15 at 09:56 PM.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  5. #75
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Texas, Vegas, Colombia
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 05:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,295

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    When there are irrational claims made about those things, yes. There are a lot of people, particularly libertarians, who treat all of those things as though they were magic. They're not. There isn't an "understanding" of rights, there are simply claims made about rights. We have to go and look at those particular claims and see if they stand up rationally and logically. Most of the time, they don't. That doesn't stop rights from existing, it just means they aren't magical as a lot of people seem to think.
    I don't consider philosophy to be "magic" whatsoever..... and ,well, these mere "claims" have stood the test of time.
    none of this stuff was invented in 1776... we've been building our understanding of these things since..well.. since the founding of philosophy itself.
    it's a rare thing that human would reverse course on their understanding ... but that seems to be the basic theme when it comes to natural rights/natural law.... lots of laymen are doing just that

    what really intrigues me about all of this is not the specific arguments.. but why people choose to disavow the existence of natural rights.
    it's interesting that people will go to lengths to disavow something that is ultimately beneficial to each and every one of us and consist of nothing harmful to any of us....my guess is that it completely surrounds political expedience/bias.
    it seems to me that more than one person around here disavows their existence merely on the grounds that libertarians believe in them... and i think that's born out fairly well by simply looking at their responses ( even yours)

  6. #76
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Texas, Vegas, Colombia
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 05:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,295

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    Because in this country, you have every possible right unless there's a constitutionally sound reason to restrict it. That's what the ninth amendment is for.
    it's interesting how many people believe rights didn't exist before 1776.
    on what basis do you believe you have every right possible unless there's a constitutionally sound reason to restrict it?... what makes you believe this to be true?



    You're not talking about principles. You're talking about feeling entitled. I think you ought to refine your definitions.
    oy vey... I didn't know i actually had to explain what a right is to you.. i would have assumed you already had an understanding.
    a right is a just claim to something... a just claim is the same as being entitled.
    in this discussion, we''re talking about having just claims to something by virtue of our nature...we're entitled to something by virtue of nature.





    Of course rights exist. We're talking about whether or not they're a human construct or if they're intrinsic to nature. You are asserting the latter while I am demonstrating good reason why it's the former.
    well, this is generally where the meat and potatoes of the discussion comes in ... are these rights created by man.. or are they discovered and developed by man?
    if they are created, who are the creators? and on what basis did these creations take hold?... personally, I can't fathom an accidental creation of such a thing that just so happens to coincidence perfectly with natural human reason and behavior... but then again, i'm not a big believer in magic or incredible coincidence that just so happens to be as valid today as it was 2500 years ago... or 2000 years ago.. or 200 years ago.



    You should try to be more clear when you speak then, so people can understand you.
    sure thing.. i'll try not to use simple english words from now on



    Yes, they are about human interaction. They are therefore a creation of humans
    again.. creation or discovery?..... feel free to provide an argument as to why they are a creation as opposed to a discovery.

  7. #77
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-17-16 @ 04:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,122

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Perhaps. It would be hard to argue against the concept of natural rights as a collective good, though, given that they spring from the very needs and character of the human condition, and are things virtually all of us want.

    And as I've argued before.... even if you believe they ARE a social construct, are those rights more secure if the general populace believes them "Natural Law" or ordained by God... or if everyone just says "oh well they're just social constructs..." (and therefore subject to change or discarding...)


    I'd prefer they be viewed as sacrosanct in some manner... seems more secure to me.
    The concept of natural rights has mostly been used for good. On the negative side, I have seen it used as an argument for selfishness rather than a concern for the community and for opposing newly recognized rights because they weren't considered by the founding fathers.

    I don't think the general public needs to think that their rights are god given for those rights to be valued, they just need a reasonably good knowledge of history.

  8. #78
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-17-16 @ 04:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,122

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    Of course rights exist. We're talking about whether or not they're a human construct or if they're intrinsic to nature...Rights are about human interaction. They are therefore a creation of humans....The [founding fathers] weren't equating rights to physical laws or anything like that. They were saying that rights don't come from kings. They were advocating a better society, not magic.

    The concept of natural rights is an incredibly imprecise method for determining what should be protected. There is no way to demonstrate nature's stance on anything to do with rights.

    Rights are not "just" social constructs. We create them, and we can improve them. They aren't handed down by anyone, and so they aren't static. Leaving rights up to a god would mean that we'd still have slavery. In 1789, the concept of natural rights meant that we had rights that kings couldn't take away. In 2015, it's just an excuse to say that everything was perfect in 1789 and we shouldn't progress beyond that.

    Rights should be viewed as extremely flimsy and easily disposed of. That obliges us to continually act to protect them and not allow ourselves to get complacent. Complacency about our rights has lead us to allow incredible injustices.
    This quote is edited from two posts by Paschendale with the word 'rights' substituted for 'they' a couple of times for clarity. I did this to summarize his excellent arguments concisely. I hope I did not change his intended message.

  9. #79
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    28,244

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrilla View Post
    I don't consider philosophy to be "magic" whatsoever..... and ,well, these mere "claims" have stood the test of time.
    none of this stuff was invented in 1776... we've been building our understanding of these things since..well.. since the founding of philosophy itself.
    it's a rare thing that human would reverse course on their understanding ... but that seems to be the basic theme when it comes to natural rights/natural law.... lots of laymen are doing just that
    And that's yet another logical fallacy, the argument from tradition. It doesn't matter how long the belief has been around, it doesn't matter how many people believe it, it only matters if it's actually defensible and demonstrable in reality. All the hand waving in the world isn't going to change that.

    what really intrigues me about all of this is not the specific arguments.. but why people choose to disavow the existence of natural rights.
    I thought that would be obvious by now, because they haven't been actually demonstrated to exist in the real world. It's the same reason people disavow the existence of gods and unicorns and leprechauns. No proof=no belief.

    it's interesting that people will go to lengths to disavow something that is ultimately beneficial to each and every one of us and consist of nothing harmful to any of us....my guess is that it completely surrounds political expedience/bias.
    it seems to me that more than one person around here disavows their existence merely on the grounds that libertarians believe in them... and i think that's born out fairly well by simply looking at their responses ( even yours)
    Whether or not a position is beneficial is irrelevant if the position isn't actually real. It doesn't matter how a fantasy makes you feel, you don't get to use that emotional comfort as a means of arguing that the fantasy is actually true. That's the whole problem here, you have libertarians (among others) who are claiming that natural rights are real when they cannot demonstrate that they are. It's the exact same thing as the religious right claiming that their imaginary friends in the sky are real. No proof=no belief.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  10. #80
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 02:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,463

    Re: Do You Believe In Natural Rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard Truth View Post
    The concept of natural rights has mostly been used for good. On the negative side, I have seen it used as an argument for selfishness rather than a concern for the community and for opposing newly recognized rights because they weren't considered by the founding fathers.

    I don't think the general public needs to think that their rights are god given for those rights to be valued, they just need a reasonably good knowledge of history.
    That's because natural rights are negative. Anyone that finds merit in natural rights must oppose postive rights.

Page 8 of 100 FirstFirst ... 6789101858 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •