What are "Human Rights" and where do they come from?

[durangodawood]

I contend those reasons you can think of why slavery can be considered wrong, are all subjective reasons. Do you agree?

I agree that "wrong" lives in the subjects mind.

But "bad for human flourishing" is, on balance, an objective criterion. And we can say that about slavery.

 

[Ken-1122]

I agree that "wrong" lives in the subjects mind.

But "bad for human flourishing" is, on balance, an objective criterion. And we can say that about slavery.

Would you agree that slavery can be good for the slave owners, as well as those who benefit from the success of the slave owners?

 

[durangodawood]

Would you agree that slavery can be good for the slave owners, as well as those who benefit from the success of the slave owners?

Possibly, in a short term sense. But in the long term, it ruins their culture and society. So overall, no.

 

[Ken-1122]

Possibly, in a short term sense. But in the long term, it ruins their culture and society. So overall, no.

It ruins their culture and society? By whose standards; yours or theirs? And can you provide objective proof of this?

 

[durangodawood]

It ruins their culture and society? By whose standards; yours or theirs? And can you provide objective proof of this?

By the standards of people whos ignorance has been replaced with the facts about what makes the human animal most satisfied.

I could walk you through it. But its a lot of work to hold your hand as we go step by step through this.

 

[Ken-1122]

By the standards of people whos ignorance has been replaced with the facts about what makes the human animal most satisfied.

I could walk you through it. But its a lot of work to hold your hand as we go step by step through this.

I'm not asking you to hold my hand or anything, I'm just asking you to provide objective facts to support your claim.

 

[durangodawood]

I'm not asking you to hold my hand or anything, I'm just asking you to provide objective facts to support your claim.

Its not like "they" keep stats on this stuff you can just look up on wikipedia. Its the kind of argument that usually takes a book to make.

Consider me unwilling to do the work. Therefore I lose the argument. Oh well. But keep your eyes open to my point as you go through life. See if it pans out as you learn about history and what makes people really satisfied.

 

[Carlos234]

This question is addressed particularly to the non-theist. Does human rights actually exist? Or are they merely an invention of our own design? Are human rights objectively established, or are they relative? Or do I dare to say that they are "God given"?

They are God given. In the beginning when man was created there was only battles and misery. Man was completely hopeless when it came to controlling their senses, their mind. The mind consists of negative qualities such as greed, anger, hate, lust, selfishness, ego etc. Man had nothing at their disposal to help them acquire liberation from such animalistic tendencies. So God created several books with which man can use to establish and live peacefully with each other and acquire the ultimate goal of self-realization. These books are called 'The Vedas'.

 

[Ken-1122]

Its not like "they" keep stats on this stuff you can just look up on wikipedia. Its the kind of argument that usually takes a book to make.

Consider me unwilling to do the work. Therefore I lose the argument. Oh well. But keep your eyes open to my point as you go through life. See if it pans out as you learn about history and what makes people really satisfied.

Perhaps you are misunderstanding me. I agree slavery is wrong, I just don't believe the wrong is objective; but subjective.

 

[durangodawood]

Perhaps you are misunderstanding me. I agree slavery is wrong, I just don't believe the wrong is objective; but subjective.

OK. So why do you think slavery is wrong?

 

[Ken-1122]

OK. So why do you think slavery is wrong?

Why do I consider slavery subjectively wrong? Because it goes against my moral code. What do I consider moral? I define morality as the ability to understand the consequences of actions and how they affect me and my neighbor. And it starts from the position that what is helpful to me and my neighbor is good, and what is harmful to me and my neighbor is bad.

It is my view, that whatever good might come from slavery to those who are not enslaved, is outweighed by the harm done to those who are. That is why I view slavery as wrong.

I've got a feeling you are going to disagree; if so tell me where I've gone wrong.

 

[durangodawood]

...And it starts from the position that what is helpful to me and my neighbor is good, and what is harmful to me and my neighbor is bad....

Good post, but I want to focus on this part^.

Do you know why you find it good to do helpful things for you and/or your neighbor?

Or is this just a sort of bottom-line inexplicable feeling which objective scrutiny cannot penetrate?

 

[Tinker Grey]

Do you know why you find it good to do helpful things for you and/or your neighbor?

Because that is how my species evolved. I can't help but be what I am ... and what I am compels me to cooperate. Why do some not care? Because our behavior patterns fall on a spectrum with most of us bunched in the middle.

 

[durangodawood]

Because that is how my species evolved. I can't help but be what I am ... and what I am compels me to cooperate. Why do some not care? Because our behavior patterns fall on a spectrum with most of us bunched in the middle.

I do think there's some benevolence written into our code.

But I also think its further written into the culture, as the wise have observed that malevolence, or even indifference, to those around you creates an overall less happy society.

 

[Belk]

I contend those reasons you can think of why slavery can be considered wrong, are all subjective reasons. Do you agree?

I would most certainly concur with that. While I can point to objective facts in the end the opinion of slavery being wrong is subjective.

 

[Ana the Ist]

This question is addressed particularly to the non-theist. Does human rights actually exist? Or are they merely an invention of our own design? Are human rights objectively established, or are they relative? Or do I dare to say that they are "God given"?

Rights...laws...these concepts exist where they are enforced. Until then, they exist as ideas. Once enforced, they become examples of those ideas...examples which exist in more practical terms.

You can dare to say or imagine whatever you like...that doesn't make it true.

 

[stevevw]

This question is addressed particularly to the non-theist. Does human rights actually exist? Or are they merely an invention of our own design? Are human rights objectively established, or are they relative? Or do I dare to say that they are "God given"?

I think human rights is subjective and when this is combined with subjective morality then it can be hard to determine where to draw the line regarding what rights should be denied. For example, the right to artistic expression and freedom of the press can allow violence and inappropriate content to be promoted. For one person this may be wrong and a bad influence but for another, this can be just about a persons right to express themselves.

 

[gaara4158]

Human rights are a social construct, like a corporation or financial credit. It is a useful fiction that compels us to cooperate in ways that benefit everyone, which would be difficult or impossible to achieve otherwise. They come from the general agreement within a society that humans ought to be entitled to certain courtesies and ought not be denied certain commodities. Most will agree that respecting human rights is a good thing, but if you want to really understand it objectively you must understand that it's not "real."

 

[jayem]

Human rights are a social construct, like a corporation or financial credit. It is a useful fiction that compels us to cooperate in ways that benefit everyone, which would be difficult or impossible to achieve otherwise. They come from the general agreement within a society that humans ought to be entitled to certain courtesies and ought not be denied certain commodities. Most will agree that respecting human rights is a good thing, but if you want to really understand it objectively you must understand that it's not "real."

That's true in a sense. But the concept of rights exists only because humans are a social species. Which is a result of how our brains evolved. Rights are real in the sense that--at the most basic level--they're a corollary of our neurobiology. Rights wouldn't exist at all if we lived solitary lives, like pandas, or bears, or sea turtles. And neither would civilization.

 

[gaara4158]

That's true in a sense. But the concept of rights exists only because humans are a social species. Which is a result of how our brains evolved. Rights are real in the sense that--at the most basic level--they're a corollary of our neurobiology. Rights wouldn't exist at all if we lived solitary lives, like pandas, or bears, or sea turtles. And neither would civilization.

Yes, they are real in the sense that they exert force in the world, but they are not real in the concrete sense that we are real. But that's ok, they don't need to be any more real than they are.