Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: "Mark-T" <mark-t2@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 9 Jul 2006 01:58:44 -0700
James L. Hankins wrote:
snip
then there must be some opposing philosophical
arguments to support your belief that Man is NOT born with an inherent
right to be free.
It's a point of view. You ask the question about natural rights as if
there is a correct yes or no answer. The answer depends on what
you, as an individual, believe, and is relative to that. It's not the
same thing as asking if the Earth revolves around the sun.
The assertion of individal freedom as a natural right, can be
supported by appeal to nature, and human nature, hence
scientifically valid, not "whatever you want to believe, dude".
Thus: every species adapts, and survives, through its unique
phenotypes; e.g. birds have beaks and wings, cats have
claws, chameleons change color, etc.
Now, what traits does man have, that he's still kicking?
We're about the slowest, weakest critter around. Answer:
cognition, and opposable thumbs. Then, how to make
best use of these? Freedom - to think, to decide, and to
act on those decisions. Any restrictions are unnatural,
in the sense of impairment of our survival faculties.
Plus, the "pursuit of happiness" bit...
Ergo, freedom is a necessary condition, as an ecological
imperative, and society must be organized to minimize
any impingements. QED
You've just described an opinion; a world view that a person might have. I
like Shipley's idea of saying it's a principle by which to live and view the
world rather than a "belief." That is what you described above. A way of
looking at the world.
Semantics. What's the difference?
And even that doesn't make much sense. You say: "Any restrictions are
unnatural, in the sense of impairment of our survival faculties."
Restrictions may be unnatural (they're not, of course, but that's another
problem with your presentation) but it's a huge leap from: restrictions are
unnatural, to: we are endowed with a a natural right to something; and that
right exists separate and apart from the belief systems of ourseslves and
others.
What leap? It's logical. "restrictions are unnatural" ==>
"non-restrictions are natural" ... and another word
for non-restrictions is ______
Then when I say we have a natural right to something
which is natural (beneficial, optimal) to our existence,
which is, in fact, man's state as nature intended, that
also follows logically.
Now, if someone claims this is "just a belief system",
well ok... I guess the idea that leaping off tall buildings
is doubleplusungood, is "just a belief system" too...
I think that, like Paul, you believe in natural rights because you are
convinced it's "right." Here's the thing: I believe it, too. But I know
there is no force that makes it so other than my own intellect and the
inellects of my fellow humans.
That doesn't make sense, unless you subscribe to the "there
is no reality outside my skull" weltanschaung... how do you
know the earth revolves around the sun, independent of your
intellect? Or - a better question, regarding science history -
how do you know that atoms exist?
Mark
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: William Coleman
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: Rich Shipley
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- References:
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: James L. Hankins
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: James L. Hankins
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: wuzyoungoncetoo
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: Paul Gee
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: James L. Hankins
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: Rich Shipley
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: Paul Gee
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: James L. Hankins
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: Paul Gee
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: James L. Hankins
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: Paul Gee
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: James L. Hankins
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: Paul Gee
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: BillB
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: wuzyoungoncetoo
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: Paul Gee
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: James L. Hankins
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: Paul Gee
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: James L. Hankins
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: Mark-T
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- From: James L. Hankins
- Re: (OT) WW III?
- Prev by Date: You'd think partypoker.com could keep running servers with the MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THEY MAKE EVERY DAY
- Next by Date: Re: (OT) WW III?
- Previous by thread: Re: (OT) WW III?
- Next by thread: Re: (OT) WW III?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|