I think it is time to talk a little about rights, especially these so-called natural rights. Now, rights are an interesting and useful concept or ethical construct, but they are neither natural or organic. They did not magically fall from the sky nor were they created by some prophet or seer. They are just human concepts conceived by humans to recognize certain freedoms that they believe should be shared by all (or at least all within a society or tribe), and they have existed in various forms throughout history. At the end of the day though, rights are just another human construct or abstraction. Also, If a tyranny of the majority, a totalitarian state, well armed thugs, or a powerful elite can dictate to you or take away these natural rights, you do not end up having rights at all, but rather temporary privileges. The idea of natural rights was not conceived until to the Days of Enlightenment by philosophers like Locke and Paine. The concept of natural rights was conceived to challenge the divine rights of kings, which was just another human construct or abstraction in which people, at one time, believed was also natural, divine, and/or self evident. Again, there is nothing magical about these natural rights. They are just philosophical constructs created by men and are not much different than the concept of rights that have existed for centuries. There is no objective proof that rights exist outside of human philosophy, and for that matter, rights have always been connected to either some type of collective ideal or by some philosophical or governing authority. I would add that if natural rights are so self evident, why do we have to continually remind so many people about these rights and why do so many people feel that it is so easy to ignore or infringe on these rights? Also, rights have continually differed from culture to culture, nationality to nationality, religion to religion, and from one epoch to another....and many of these rights (from one group or time to another) have not been that self evident to various other groups of people or societies. There are even differing amounts of these rights from culture to culture, nationality to nationality, religion to religion, and from time to time, but again, theyre supposedly self evident and somehow timeless and global??? At the end of the day, the idea of self evident natural rights just does not hold up to scrutiny. The thing is, I do not think it is really that complicated. It just makes logical and practical sense to treat others the way you want to be treated and to not infringe on the freedoms of others if you do not want your own freedoms infringed (or basically the Golden Rule or similar rules throughout religions, cultures, and philosophies). Sadly, this simple concept seems to be easily ignored or forgotten or just does not register with certain people, especially people who have obtained a certain amount of power, control, and/or influence over others. Lastly, rights, as they are written in constitutions or official documents, are met more as established constraints on the abuse of power from governments, powerful institutions, the tyranny of the majority, and/or the tyranny of a minority of elites than to grant rights to a populace. Rights are basically a written reminder that people, especially people with a certain amount of power, control, and influence over others, should not infringe on these freedoms. Of course, the concept of rights only work when there is a vigilant critical mass to fight against the people who would infringe on these rights. Without people to fight against tyrants, crooks, frauds, and bullies, rights do not mean much of anything. I would just add that the concept of rights have certainly gained a fair amount of baggage, and now, have been used to push all kinds of agendas that have nothing to do with freedom or liberty. (FYI - This OP is composed of comments I made earlier on the topic of rights, along with new material.) ~Andrew
Posted on: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 03:25:18 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015