| View Blog
|
|
| Rights Invented And Recognized
|
|
|
Rights are invented; rights are not discovered. The rights we recognize today were invented
yesterday; they were not discovered.
Now, one may answer this by saying: "No! Rights were discovered because they are part
of morality and morality is not invented but discovered."
My answer to this is very simple. I believe that morality is an invention of the human intellect.
I believe that morality is a creation of the human imagination.
I believe that every person's convictions are each person's conclusions. We are persuaded by
our opinions. And every case we make for what we believe is an argument made from sentiment.
We may not like this; but, I believe that we cannot escape this. We are condemned to freedom;
and so, we are free to believe, or to doubt. We are free to believe in civil rights, in natural rights;
and, we are just as free to doubt and to question the rights we enjoy. We cannot take comfort in
the objective existence of eternal rights. We can and we must fight for all the rights we demand
and enjoy.
I cannot say if what you believe is wrong. I can only say of what you believe that it is not what I
believe. I have not criticized any person for what they happen to believe. I have always criticized
people for mis-taking, mis-stating, mis-understanding, and mis-representing what I expressly
believe and declare.
I believe that it is a truism to say that one who acts dishonorably in one context will possibly or
probably act dishonorably in other contexts. I also believe that one who acts dishonorably in
some moments may and will act honorably in other moments.
I often do behave as if moral principles and axioms were true, real, sure, and fixed. But, any
and every confident certainty does not indicate that what one believes to be certain is in fact
certain. We can be confident in doing what we believe to be right, good, fair and just; but,
when we do what we believe is right, good, fair and just we are bringing into being what we
imagine to be right, good, fair and just. The moral act is a creative act. To do what is right,
good, fair and just is to make these excellent qualities. The noble person is a work of art.
The good gentleman is a successful artist; the virtuous lady is a victorious author.
Some of what I believe to be obvious is not obvious to every person. Some of what I believe
is right is not what is right to every person.
What are the ontological and/or the etiological foundations of rights -- be they human rights,
civil rights, natural rights, or whatever? Every right is a construct of human beings, who need
to live together in peace and in agreement. Rights come from both self-respect and respect
for others, from duty both to self and to others. Promise-keeping is an example of self-respect
and respect for others. Being trustworthy is another example of self-respect and respect for
others. God is not the author of rights; and God is not the creator of respect. Human beings
are the creators of rights; and human beings are the authors of trust. The origin and evolution
of rights is to be found in human practice, in human friendship.
Your beliefs ought to be based upon facts; but, not on facts alone. Facts themselves are not
certain, unqualified, or absolute. Facts can and do change. Some facts are not necessary.
Social facts are not fate. There are facts which are our fault.
Moral beliefs are not based on facts. And facts are themselves always interpreted. Facts are
always given or revealed in our own individual reading of reality. We are each and every one a
witness of facts; and so, we all have our very own version of reality, based on our own vision of
the facts. It is a problematical exercise to attempt to separate the facts from fiction, or the truth
from untruth.
"Error has no end."
-- Robert Browning
|
|
Posted by rallen2 on 2008-07-25 20:51:31 | Rating: | Views: 82
|
|
| |
|
|
| Blog Comments
|
|
|
|
Fact: if you scratch enough you will eventually see bllod
Belief: if i keep scratching it will eventually go away but i have to keep on scratching
Conclusion: life will still keep on turning even if you keep on scratching
|
|
Posted by JLOyola
on 2008-07-25 21:11:34
|
|
|
|
|
rights need language as all expressions need language. they are however inherent to us as human beings. codified some, but the basics are their, lie beneath our skin, irregardless of our intellect. if we have sex with our siblings or our parents, our offspring will be faulty. hence a right, to be free from such inconsistencies. it is also a belief, and hence one may stipulate a morality. if we are careless or rather, if we betray or backstab, the when at war our society is suseptible to inward downfall; hence, betrayal and lies exist, not as some construct but as a behaviour that is tantemount to morality. monkeys give their backs to one another to check for flees and bugs. inherent to this action is the right, belief, moral thought, that, given such a vulnerable position, the other monkey will not bash their brains in. hence, a right to be groomed. our rights extend from throughout history, genetically, societally; such rights exist in societies with and without codified rules. some such rights are inherent to us. and skeptism of reality does not negate the effects of death. i think therefor i act; we all act therefore we all exist. our realities are the sum of each experiences, but more as well; just as our conscious and being is more than simply the electro-juices of our brains. reality is more than shattered versions, there is a uniformity and consistency to it. to believe otherwise is to tip-toe in delusion.
|
|
Posted by bloodintheeyes
on 2008-07-26 15:00:34
|
|
|
|
Hello “bloodintheeyes:”
Thank you, again, for your comments.
I’ll get right down to answering your
comment. Again, what I write is my
opinion.
You wrote: “Rights need language as
all expressions need language.”
I agree with you. So then, perhaps, we
can say that rights are a language-
construct, since we cannot think about
rights, or talk about rights without a
pre-existing language about rights.
Where did this language about rights
come from? From human beings. From
human community. And since language-
usage must always be interpreted, then
the rights we now possess and enjoy are
a creation and construction of human
beings, and human beings must interpret
and define these rights. We must infer
rights from rights. We must work to
disentangle rights from wrongs. We
must learn rights, and teach rights.
And, we must live so that the rights we
desire and demand can be exemplified.
The truth of rights can only be
understood and illustrated by an honest
and virtuous practice of rights in our
relationships.
You wrote: “They [rights] are however
inherent to us as human beings.
codified some, but the basics are
there, lie beneath our skin,
irregardless of our intellect.”
I disagree with you here. I do not
believe that “rights are inherent to us
as human beings”. It is human beings
that determine and decide what being a
human is about. Freedom is inherent in
us as human beings: self-determination,
self-definition, etc. Indeed, some
rights have been codified. Some rights
have been enumerated in various
constitutions. But, even the codified
rights are not clarified. For example,
there is the legal right to own
property. But, how can this be a
genuine legal right, if so many people
do not possess the little property they
need to live a full and free life,
while others possess far more property
than they need to live a full and free
life? How can there be a genuine legal
right to property if the legitimate
process of acquiring property is not
codified or specified? Is there a
right to property that has been wrongly
taken? For example, if John Locke’s
labor theory of property rights is
respected and observed, how can there
be a capital practice of property
acquisition and rights? In capitalism,
there is a right to property, but this
right is restricted to the right of
proprietors to receive property from
producers, and the right of producers
to what they have produced is neglected
or obscured.
You wrote: “If we have sex with our
siblings or our parents, our offspring
will be faulty. hence a right, to be
free from such inconsistencies. it is
also a belief, and hence one may
stipulate a morality.”
All political rights are, or should be,
derived from principles of moral right.
You wrote: “If we are careless or
rather, if we betray or backstab, the
when at war our society is suseptible
to inward downfall; hence, betrayal and
lies exist, not as some construct but
as a behaviour that is tantemount to
morality. monkeys give their backs to
one another to check for flees and
bugs. inherent to this action is the
right, belief, moral thought, that,
given such a vulnerable position, the
other monkey will not bash their brains
in. hence, a right to be groomed.”
I am not sure that we can talk about
rights, or morality, within simian
societies.
You wrote: “Our rights extend from
throughout history, genetically,
societally; such rights exist in
societies with and without codified
rules.”
I disagree. We enjoy rights that
people did not enjoy in the past. The
rights we possess today were not
possessed in the past. People simply
did not have a concept of rights in the
distant past.
You wrote: “Some such rights are
inherent to us. and skeptism of reality
does not negate the effects of death. i
think therefor i act; we all act
therefore we all exist.”
Indeed skepticism concerning objective
and subjective reality do not negate
death.
You wrote: “Our realities are the sum
of each experiences, but more as well;
just as our conscious and being is more
than simply the electro-juices of our
brains.”
I believe that consciousness comes from
a material body, and that there is no
more to consciousness than the material
body, with its physical brain and
somatic nervous system.
As for our being, the affirmation of
being is predicated on our freedom and
creativity.
You wrote: “Reality is more than
shattered versions, there is a
uniformity and consistency to it. to
believe otherwise is to tip-toe in
delusion.”
Reality is a construct. Both
subjective and objective reality are
constructs. We are free to make
reality. There is nothingness and
there is meaninglessness; and, from
these we can create something, a self,
and we can invent a meaning for our
self and our life. Imagination is what
we have.
We are, or we can be, possibilities.
We can imagine a self we will to be.
Every truth is an error; but, every
error can be a truth.
|
|
Posted by rallen2
on 2008-07-27 20:13:39
|
|
|
|
|
if i jump off a building- believing i can fly. and all below me believe it as well. sincerly. {consider a social experiement; the people involved in the experiment myself included, all have been raised since birth, and through manipulation of their perceived reality, that humans can fly} i will still fall, and die. this is not a construct of death, nor an extension of beliefs. this is inherent to the system of reality. a reality which exists and has rules and definitions that preexist our own understanding of and beliefs. simians have the right to produce offspring. giving them human charactersitics and basing rights on human definitions of rights, precludes the existence of what a right is; a right is the ability. any ability. whether that right is excercised is up to the individual. monkeys have a right to reproduce. it is genetic. we have rights to be free. women have rights to be free from being raped. how? because they must be aroused to be penetrated easily. this arrousal implies acceptance of an act. thus this implies a right to be aroused, inherent in their systems. we have the right to life. how. because we have hands and bodies capable of self defense. we can defend our lives. our blood and organs adapt to stress to ameliorate a situation thus presented with us. we ingest food. the food in our stomachs, that we have stomaches implies that that food is ours; we ate it, and are digesting it. a cellular right. to get this food one must kill and open us up. thus, we have the right of property; the properties of that which we ate and are digesting. it should follow that digesting cash, cars and houses should be a logical and within the bounds of a right inherent in the fact that we are gifted with intelligence and the ability to protect our cars, and our undigested food.
|
|
Posted by bloodintheeyes
on 2008-07-27 22:00:58
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email This to a Friend 
