Discussion in 'Off Topic Area' started by faster than you, Jun 2, 2005.

  1. faster than you

    faster than you Valued Member

    if you believe in rights or human nature? why? that's admitting that there is some sort of contoling force flying around that is telling you what to do? where did these rights or human nature come from?
    they aren't preexisting or innate, but rather fabrications of culture to explain behavior or beliefs.
    why do you believe in innate rights or human nature?
    Last edited: Jun 2, 2005
  2. CraigLeeJKD

    CraigLeeJKD formerly 'into_the_abyss'

    Wanna run that one by me again?
  3. Kinjiro Tsukasa

    Kinjiro Tsukasa I'm hungry; got troll? Supporter

    Hello? Are you trying to ask a question, or just insult people here? If you have a question, please restate it so it's clearer. I'll be watching...
  4. medi

    medi Sadly Passed Away - RIP

    Umm. what the other two said. You're not very clear.

    But I'll try anyway.

    Rights: By 'innate rights' as you call them, I think most people mean 'rights that should be treated as if they were innate. i.e. they can't be disregarded under any circumstances. Believing that doesn't mean you think there is some actual universal law which gives human beings rights.

    I have no idea what you mean by 'human nature' being a product of culture. I think by defintion 'human nature' is independant of culture. What did YOU mean by it?
  5. Davey Bones

    Davey Bones New Member

    In terms of rights, do you mean "rights" a la the Declaration of Independence or US Constitution? Y'know, inalieable rights?

    And pls define "human nature"?
  6. Maverick

    Maverick New Member

    You only have the rights that society considers you to have.
  7. CosmicFish

    CosmicFish Aleprechaunist

    I'm confused by your question too, but I'll try to define rights and human nature how I understand them. I'll be kinda free-thinking as I go so I might not make a huge amount of sense either!

    Rights: I don't think there is any objective "force" or "standard" determining our rights. (I'm an atheist, in case it's relevant.) I think we define our own rights and expect each other to stick to them because we're inherently a social species. I think the whole "do to others as you would like them to do to you" comes about because we are also a weak species and if we weren't co-operative and social then natural selection would have weeded us out ages ago.

    Human nature: My opinion on this is fairly simplistic. We are a race of beings called "humans" and we have certain ways of behaving in common we call our "nature". Addmittedly, an individual's reaction can never be 100% predictable in many of circumstances. However, it's possible to say that x-y% of people will behave in this way when confronted with that situation. I'd say human nature is a convenient label for the more predictable reactions of the majority of us.

    Just my thoughts.
  8. cloudz

    cloudz Valued Member

    There are 2 types of 'rights'

    right ones and wrong ones. The right ones are few and far between, and would apply universally to intelligence. The majority of man made laws and rights are pretty innefectual and bogus anyway. 'higher' and 'lower' nature are within us all. The human race on the whole is just not quite sussed yet in expressing and understanding this concept just yet.

    A majority still seem to rely on outdated concepts of rights and wrongs.

    Just ask any :Alien:

    Universal Cosmic Law - The internet TV series coming soon to a computer screen near you!. Probably around 8.30pm 21st May 2035
    Starring Budda, Jesus and friends.
  9. ThaiBxr

    ThaiBxr Banned Banned

    No, rights aren't are innate, as humans we're really quite brutal by nature... however rights evolved out of necessity in order to keep a smooth running society. I don't want to bore you with a bunch of roman, and 16th - 18th century history, but basically we tried the whole no rights system, ppl got ****ed off and rallied behind a bunch of philosophes preaching natural human rights, people went and did some bad ass pillaging... especially those crazy Frenchies, and POOF! RIGHTS!
  10. Cuchulain82

    Cuchulain82 Custodia Legis

    Thai bxr is a little crass, but I basically agree. I believe in Human Rights, but they are a social function. The root of their existance isn't as important to me as the fact that they are acknowledged and protected.
  11. Bil Gee

    Bil Gee Thug

    I see them in the same way. They're a good idea, not something that is intrinsic to society.
  12. Kwajman

    Kwajman Penguin in paradise....

    We have whatever rights society or the government decides to give us. Some societies have more than others, some, less.
  13. Cuchulain82

    Cuchulain82 Custodia Legis

    I disagree, but only because I believe in the social contract and consequently we have an active role in deciding what our rights are. A lack of society (ie- the State of Nature) is when every individual has every right, including the right to rape, steal, kill, etc. We agree to forego some rights (like the aforementioned) for the safety and prosperity of all. That is a Social Contract.
  14. Bil Gee

    Bil Gee Thug

    Good point, we can't say that "society" decides as though it is something distinct from ourselves. (not in a democracy anyway).
  15. Cuchulain82

    Cuchulain82 Custodia Legis

    That's the basic idea at least. It depends upon who you read- both Hobbes and Rousseau believed in the Social Contract, but their ideas of it are radically different.

    To say that it is the government that gives us our rights is true, but only because we enable the government to do so. They just enforce what we want them to.
  16. cloudz

    cloudz Valued Member

    Do they?
  17. cloudz

    cloudz Valued Member

    They are only really acknowledged& protected in the hearts and minds of people, and not on paper. So active role -yes. A govrnment will pass any bill it needs to stay in control.

    So what has happened to true democracy. When it began it marked a coincided with an incredibly productive and shaping period. unortunately it did not last long till rhetoric and power corrupted it.

    What about today?

    Why is there 2-3 big parties opposing eachother? Are they not all there to represent us all? If they cannot work together for the good of all, where does that leave the rest of us?

    What if everyone had a say if they wanted, any law they have an interest in?
    Is that theoretically possible today? Hmm lets ask Bill Gates.

    The majority of politicians it seems to me, are more concerned with staying in their position, going higher,beating the opposition and getting fat. Perhaps it is not their fault, it is the game we have set up. And of course human nature.

    what would be the consequences of true democracy?

    Would it make a difference?

    Human Rights? what does it mean anyway.

    not causing harm to innocent parties. (boils down) if guilty take the punishment if innocent-people shouldn't be tortured however scummy. That'swhat courts are for to hold up the law of the people. Looks in no particular direction,its everywhere.

    I know to many this will probably sound a bit idealistic considering the 'gulf'
    between standards around the world, nevertheless it could be a standard that theoretically could be applied everywhere. I think the actual happening part seems somewhat impossible though... I wonder why? (I'm bloody idealistic that's why :D )
  18. ThaiBxr

    ThaiBxr Banned Banned

    Uhh, constitution?
  19. Bil Gee

    Bil Gee Thug

    Generally yes, the control is exercised through propaganda in a democracy, people get what they want, they just decide that they want it because they are misinformed.
    e.g. Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
  20. cloudz

    cloudz Valued Member

    How's that workin' for you?

    everything ok with free speech in your neck of the woods. Don't you find so many issues are shunted into moral high ground. By.. politicians useing religion and falsehoods based on non sequitors. But saying that the U.S constitution is a good one (the best) shame its also one of the most corrupted 'democracies'. What about the human rights of the people that US governments has shafted on foreign soil, and some of its own people.

    Trust me, when push comes to shove anything written is not worth the paper ;)
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2005

Share This Page