Quote (Santara @ Feb 26 2015 11:12am)

We can start with the easy stuff. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Let me ask you this: do you believe that the concept of negative rights is a valid concept?



Well there you go. Thank you.

Quote (duffman316 @ Feb 26 2015 10:21am)

i'm talking strictly from an objective perspective here

your actions during the fleeting moments of existence are very real and the consequences are also very real

how is this in anyway comparable to your idea of natural rights?

Quote (duffman316 @ Feb 25 2015 04:38pm)

i agree it is subjective and that's simply how things are, the laws are also constantly changing over time to reflect this

society's attitudes towards corporal punishment is a good example of this, societal norms will always play a significant role in legislative processes

if you can bring about the downfall of the govt by circulating a few flyers i'd say go for it but i doubt you'll find a consensus that taxes should be reduced to zero

Quote (Santara @ Feb 26 2015 05:11am)

Why is it any different than if the government fails to protect a right? I presume you'll at least acknowledge that the government doesn't always protect rights.



Most certainly they do.

Let me put the gist of your question back to you: Does your life have a meaningful existence if there is nothing in place to guarantee you can live?



Impossible, yes. So let's not pretend that we're doing so anyways. Most win/few lose, well what about the people who don't accept the odds?



We aren't?

Quote (Santara @ Feb 26 2015 11:12am)

We can start with the easy stuff. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Let me ask you this: do you believe that the concept of negative rights is a valid concept?

Quote (Thor123422 @ Feb 26 2015 12:28pm)

a right as protected by government is simply an expectation of how I will be treated. There's nothing mystical or unclear about that, its simply a part of the social contract that they have agreed to treat me a certain way. When that is broken it's the government not living up to it's promise. Nature makes no promises. There is no expectation of how you will be treated in nature.

Quote (Skinned @ Feb 26 2015 12:30pm)

Just as valid as positive rights. They have more in common than differentiation and the negative version just seems differently worded than the positive version, maybe describes separate sides of locus of the social interaction. To be clear: a right, positive or negative, is hardly anything more than having an expectation to be treated a certain way, no matter what the source of them are. There is argument whether or not they come from God (theologians/Divine Command Theory), pure reason (Kant), predicted outcome (Bentham/Mill), Self-Interest (Epicurus/Rand), Nature (Locke/Noziak) is continuous and I'm trying not to fall into that. To be treated a certain way requires a certain type of behavior....Socially, between two people who have Rights, there is a quid pro quo going on there, an exchange, which mandates that the two involved in the situation behave a certain way. I fail to see how a Right can be anything more than this agreement between social entities. In order for Rights to exist between people they have to share a language, there has to be some capacity to enforce, even if it is as crude as personal self-defense, and there has to be enough commonality between the parties that they're living in the same world...which isn't hard because all people are more or less equal with some variation. I don't see Rights as being anything more than a social construct that exists in a social environment that is primarily based on power dynamics.

I am an idealist and have always believed in natural rights, but upon close examination they just don't hold up. I suppose it could be said that Rights exist in the same place as the Straight Line, the Triangle, Mathematics, and Logic, as something that exists in the Perfect World that only (AFAIK) we humans are privy to...a transcended reality. Something like Time and Space which don't exist due to our experience, but something our experience is contingent on.

We got really into phenomenology and ethnomethodology today and my head is kind of spinning. I'll be back :p

Quote (Santara @ Feb 26 2015 02:04pm)

@ 1st bold: this is any different than what I'm talking about how???

@ 2nd bold: FFS you have the same misconception for what a natural right is as this poster:



Just as valid, yet you vociferously argue against them. <_<

My expectation that people not interfere with my rights is intellectually no different than your expectation that the government will punish someone who does. Neither of us deny the existence of said rights, only the semantics of their origin. Being the social creatures we are, we expect to not be murdered whether I believe it stems from basic common sense or you think it stems from force of law.

Quote (Skinned @ Feb 26 2015 01:07pm)

Not force of law, just force. Law is an expression of force, and there are other expressions. That is why I believe Rights are things to be discussed among equals.

Quote (Santara @ Feb 26 2015 02:28pm)

Only equals deserve rights?

Quote (Skinned @ 26 Feb 2015 14:07)

Not force of law, just force. Law is an expression of force, and there are other expressions. That is why I believe Rights are things to be discussed among equals.

Quote (Santara @ Feb 26 2015 01:04pm)

@ 1st bold: this is any different than what I'm talking about how???

@ 2nd bold: FFS you have the same misconception for what a natural right is as this poster:



Just as valid, yet you vociferously argue against them. <_<

My expectation that people not interfere with my rights is intellectually no different than your expectation that the government will punish someone who does. Neither of us deny the existence of said rights, only the semantics of their origin. Being the social creatures we are, we expect to not be murdered whether I believe it stems from basic common sense or you think it stems from force of law.