What Are 'Human Rights'

Occams Barber · Apr 22, 2021

What Are Human Rights?

On CF we occasionally get into discussion about a particular right; usually in a US context. While we may disagree about the particulars of the right under discussion there’s usually tacit acceptance that the right is real and somehow intrinsic to humanity. While we’ve talked about various individual rights, I can’t recall a thread which looked at rights as a concept.

This is a definition of ‘rights’ taken from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

Rights are entitlements (not) to perform certain actions, or (not) to be in certain states; or entitlements that others (not) perform certain actions or (not) be in certain states.

but this doesn’t help in understanding why a particular entitlement qualifies as a right.

Amnesty International, uses a more abstract, romanticised definition in talking about human rights:

The basic freedoms and protections that belong to every single one of us

and goes on to suggest, based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that all human beings are born with ‘equal and inalienable rights and fundamental freedoms.’

Human rights is a wide-ranging topic. To give the thread some direction I’ve tried to reduce it to a number of specific questions.:

Can we objectively determine what constitutes a ‘human right'?
Are human rights a subset of rights in general?
Are you born with human rights (that is; are they a ‘natural’ part of human nature) or are they created externally?
Are human rights really ‘inalienable’? (that is; can’t be taken away)
Are any human rights universal (that is; apply to all people across all cultures, geography and time?)

Note that this thread is about the broad concept of human rights, It’s not focused on US rights in particular nor is it about justifying, or disagreeing with, a specific right, although mentioning a particular right may be useful in illustrating a point.

A Little Light Reading.

Rights (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
What are human rights? – Amnesty International Australia
Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Wikipedia
UDHR-English-Version.pdf (unaa.org.au) (Full Text of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights)

OB

disciple Clint · Apr 22, 2021

Occams Barber said:
What Are Human Rights?

On CF we occasionally get into discussion about a particular right; usually in a US context. While we may disagree about the particulars of the right under discussion there’s usually tacit acceptance that the right is real and somehow intrinsic to humanity. While we’ve talked about various individual rights, I can’t recall a thread which looked at rights as a concept.

This is a definition of ‘rights’ taken from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

Rights are entitlements (not) to perform certain actions, or (not) to be in certain states; or entitlements that others (not) perform certain actions or (not) be in certain states.

but this doesn’t help in understanding why a particular entitlement qualifies as a right.

Amnesty International, uses a more abstract, romanticised definition in talking about human rights:

The basic freedoms and protections that belong to every single one of us

and goes on to suggest, based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that all human beings are born with ‘equal and inalienable rights and fundamental freedoms.’

Human rights is a wide-ranging topic. To give the thread some direction I’ve tried to reduce it to a number of specific questions.:

Can we objectively determine what constitutes a ‘human right'?

Are human rights a subset of rights in general?

Are you born with human rights (that is; are they a ‘natural’ part of human nature) or are they created externally?

Are human rights really ‘inalienable’? (that is; can’t be taken away)

Are any human rights universal (that is; apply to all people across all cultures, geography and time?)

Note that this thread is about the broad concept of human rights, It’s not focused on US rights in particular nor is it about justifying, or disagreeing with, a specific right, although mentioning a particular right may be useful in illustrating a point.

A Little Light Reading.

Rights (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

What are human rights? – Amnesty International Australia

Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Wikipedia

UDHR-English-Version.pdf (unaa.org.au) (Full Text of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights)

OB

Human rights are a very real and very Christian concept because the Imago Dei is central to Christian ethics. It’s wrong to murder, to steal, to defraud, and so on because all human beings have an innate value rooted in their nature as image bearers of God. To commit any of these sins against them is not just a crime but an affront to the Holy God who made them in His image. Are Human Rights Christian? - BreakPoint
God set up society in specific ways, many of which are subtle and must be read from context. Historically, these ways have been determined through the observance of nature. When we observe, the "rights" we discover vary depending on who is interpreting nature and how their historical preferences and prejudices influence their judgment. It would be better to go to the Bible. Most of the rights identified by the lifestyle God ordained are not universal—even the ideal situation does not guarantee everyone the opportunity to partake. But, in general, these are situations that God has designed for our benefit. What is a biblical view of human rights?
In the most famous passage of the Declaration of Independence, it is easy to see the connection between theism and human rights: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The Christian Roots of Human Rights

Paulomycin · Apr 22, 2021

Edit: Unable to locate notes.

Soyeong · Apr 22, 2021

Occams Barber said:
What Are Human Rights?

On CF we occasionally get into discussion about a particular right; usually in a US context. While we may disagree about the particulars of the right under discussion there’s usually tacit acceptance that the right is real and somehow intrinsic to humanity. While we’ve talked about various individual rights, I can’t recall a thread which looked at rights as a concept.

This is a definition of ‘rights’ taken from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

Rights are entitlements (not) to perform certain actions, or (not) to be in certain states; or entitlements that others (not) perform certain actions or (not) be in certain states.

but this doesn’t help in understanding why a particular entitlement qualifies as a right.

Amnesty International, uses a more abstract, romanticised definition in talking about human rights:

The basic freedoms and protections that belong to every single one of us

and goes on to suggest, based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that all human beings are born with ‘equal and inalienable rights and fundamental freedoms.’

Human rights is a wide-ranging topic. To give the thread some direction I’ve tried to reduce it to a number of specific questions.:

Can we objectively determine what constitutes a ‘human right'?

Are human rights a subset of rights in general?

Are you born with human rights (that is; are they a ‘natural’ part of human nature) or are they created externally?

Are human rights really ‘inalienable’? (that is; can’t be taken away)

Are any human rights universal (that is; apply to all people across all cultures, geography and time?)

Note that this thread is about the broad concept of human rights, It’s not focused on US rights in particular nor is it about justifying, or disagreeing with, a specific right, although mentioning a particular right may be useful in illustrating a point.

A Little Light Reading.

Rights (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

What are human rights? – Amnesty International Australia

Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Wikipedia

UDHR-English-Version.pdf (unaa.org.au) (Full Text of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights)

OB

Rights are granted to us by someone else or a group in authority and to that extent they can be whatever they think that we should be granted. However, anyone who has the authority to grant us a right also has the authority to revoke it, so the only way that the writers of the Declaration of Independence could arrive at us having inalienable rights that they could not take away is not by giving us those rights themselves but by recognizing that we have been granted those rights by someone who has a higher authority than themselves, hence the appeal to being endowed with them by our Creator.

Occams Barber · Apr 22, 2021

disciple Clint said:
Human rights are a very real and very Christian concept because the Imago Dei is central to Christian ethics. It’s wrong to murder, to steal, to defraud, and so on because all human beings have an innate value rooted in their nature as image bearers of God. To commit any of these sins against them is not just a crime but an affront to the Holy God who made them in His image. Are Human Rights Christian? - BreakPoint
God set up society in specific ways, many of which are subtle and must be read from context. Historically, these ways have been determined through the observance of nature. When we observe, the "rights" we discover vary depending on who is interpreting nature and how their historical preferences and prejudices influence their judgment. It would be better to go to the Bible. Most of the rights identified by the lifestyle God ordained are not universal—even the ideal situation does not guarantee everyone the opportunity to partake. But, in general, these are situations that God has designed for our benefit. What is a biblical view of human rights?
In the most famous passage of the Declaration of Independence, it is easy to see the connection between theism and human rights: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The Christian Roots of Human Rights

Thanks Clint.

While your quote argues that human rights are a Christian concept it says nothing about what those rights might be apart from a rather stretched attempt to connect them to the US Declaration of Independence. The author was, very obviously, an American. I'm left with the impression that God's real will (on rights) didn't get expressed until 1776.

If we look at history, as recorded in the Bible, we'll find numerous instances of breaching what we today would take as basic human rights. To me it's a bit of a stretch accommodating Biblical behaviour with our modern understanding of human rights. Even your quote is struggling with justifying this.

OB

disciple Clint · Apr 22, 2021

Occams Barber said:
Thanks Clint.

While your quote argues that human rights are a Christian concept it says nothing about what those rights might be apart from a rather stretched attempt to connect them to the US Declaration of Independence. The author was, very obviously, an American. I'm left with the impression that God's real will (on rights) didn't get expressed until 1776.

If we look at history, as recorded in the Bible, we'll find numerous instances of breaching what we today would take as basic human rights. To me it's a bit of a stretch accommodating Biblical behaviour with our modern understanding of human rights. Even your quote is struggling with justifying this.

OB

I believe that is covered in one of the other articles with links that I posted

Occams Barber · Apr 22, 2021

Be surprised. We seem to agree on most of this.

Paulomycin said:
I don't think we can. At best, Locke played a bit of empirical "sleight-of-hand" with the concept of social contract.

I agree. I see rights granted to individuals based on societal agreement. I also see rights as a variable commodity based on changing culture norms.

Paulomycin said:
No. I have always heard "rights" as simply a truncated form of "human rights."

There is possibly an argument for a hierarchy of rights. For instance the right to 'life, liberty etc.' is arguably of a higher order than the 'right to bear arms'. The arms right is more culture specific.

Paulomycin said:
I doubt it, and I don't think one can "get there" from Enlightenment philosophy alone. I've heard a few professing Christians argue for it from earlier Pre-Enlightenment forms of Natural Law, but I keep forgetting how they connected the dots.

Again, from my POV rights are a cultural, as opposed to natural phenomenon. We seem to agree.

Paulomycin said:
Not from a purely Enlightenment-era perspective, no.

Agreed. Rights are taken away all the time.

Paulomycin said:
I referred to pre-Enlightenment forms of Natural Law above. Let me review my notes.

Universal rights implies universal morality so, no.

OB

Occams Barber · Apr 22, 2021

Soyeong said:
However, anyone who has the authority to grant us a right also has the authority to revoke it, so the only way that the writers of the Declaration of Independence could arrive at us having inalienable rights that they could not take away is not by giving us those rights themselves but by recognizing that we have been granted those rights by someone who has a higher authority than themselves, hence the appeal to being endowed with them by our Creator.

A useful deception. The problem with rights is like the problem with morality. They are both difficult to justify without some reference to a higher authority.

OB

timothyu · Apr 22, 2021

A basic human right is to be left alone and not bothered if so desired.

SoldierOfTheKing · Apr 22, 2021

disciple Clint said:
In the most famous passage of the Declaration of Independence, it is easy to see the connection between theism and human rights: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

The Renaissance concept of the divine right of kings turned on its head...

Paulomycin · Apr 22, 2021

Occams Barber said:
Be surprised. We seem to agree on most of this.

I agree. I see rights granted to individuals based on societal agreement. I also see rights as a variable commodity based on changing culture norms.

There is possibly an argument for a hierarchy of rights. For instance the right to 'life, liberty etc.' is arguably of a higher order than the 'right to bear arms'. The arms right is more culture specific.

Again, from my POV rights are a cultural, as opposed to natural phenomenon. We seem to agree.

Agreed. Rights are taken away all the time.

Universal rights implies universal morality so, no.

OB

Please note timestamps above. My first post was mostly deleted 30 min prior to your response. My next post may have different information altogether.

Robban · Apr 22, 2021

Occams Barber said:
What Are Human Rights?

On CF we occasionally get into discussion about a particular right; usually in a US context. While we may disagree about the particulars of the right under discussion there’s usually tacit acceptance that the right is real and somehow intrinsic to humanity. While we’ve talked about various individual rights, I can’t recall a thread which looked at rights as a concept.

This is a definition of ‘rights’ taken from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

Rights are entitlements (not) to perform certain actions, or (not) to be in certain states; or entitlements that others (not) perform certain actions or (not) be in certain states.

but this doesn’t help in understanding why a particular entitlement qualifies as a right.

Amnesty International, uses a more abstract, romanticised definition in talking about human rights:

The basic freedoms and protections that belong to every single one of us

and goes on to suggest, based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that all human beings are born with ‘equal and inalienable rights and fundamental freedoms.’

Human rights is a wide-ranging topic. To give the thread some direction I’ve tried to reduce it to a number of specific questions.:

Can we objectively determine what constitutes a ‘human right'?

Are human rights a subset of rights in general?

Are you born with human rights (that is; are they a ‘natural’ part of human nature) or are they created externally?

Are human rights really ‘inalienable’? (that is; can’t be taken away)

Are any human rights universal (that is; apply to all people across all cultures, geography and time?)

Note that this thread is about the broad concept of human rights, It’s not focused on US rights in particular nor is it about justifying, or disagreeing with, a specific right, although mentioning a particular right may be useful in illustrating a point.

A Little Light Reading.

Rights (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

What are human rights? – Amnesty International Australia

Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Wikipedia

UDHR-English-Version.pdf (unaa.org.au) (Full Text of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights)

OB

I think the first definition (Stanford) is on the ball by connecting it to entitlement, entitlement most often leads to pride,

and pride most often goes before a fall.

Gregory Thompson · Apr 22, 2021

Occams Barber said:
What Are Human Rights?

On CF we occasionally get into discussion about a particular right; usually in a US context. While we may disagree about the particulars of the right under discussion there’s usually tacit acceptance that the right is real and somehow intrinsic to humanity. While we’ve talked about various individual rights, I can’t recall a thread which looked at rights as a concept.

This is a definition of ‘rights’ taken from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

Rights are entitlements (not) to perform certain actions, or (not) to be in certain states; or entitlements that others (not) perform certain actions or (not) be in certain states.

but this doesn’t help in understanding why a particular entitlement qualifies as a right.

Amnesty International, uses a more abstract, romanticised definition in talking about human rights:

The basic freedoms and protections that belong to every single one of us

and goes on to suggest, based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that all human beings are born with ‘equal and inalienable rights and fundamental freedoms.’

Human rights is a wide-ranging topic. To give the thread some direction I’ve tried to reduce it to a number of specific questions.:

Can we objectively determine what constitutes a ‘human right'?

Are human rights a subset of rights in general?

Are you born with human rights (that is; are they a ‘natural’ part of human nature) or are they created externally?

Are human rights really ‘inalienable’? (that is; can’t be taken away)

Are any human rights universal (that is; apply to all people across all cultures, geography and time?)

Note that this thread is about the broad concept of human rights, It’s not focused on US rights in particular nor is it about justifying, or disagreeing with, a specific right, although mentioning a particular right may be useful in illustrating a point.

A Little Light Reading.

Rights (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

What are human rights? – Amnesty International Australia

Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Wikipedia

UDHR-English-Version.pdf (unaa.org.au) (Full Text of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights)

OB

Human rights relates to the concept to treat others as you would like to be treated, as long as you're not a [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse].

Because some people are masochists, (and would totally misinterpret treat others the way you would like to be treated) writing out specifically what is the proper treatment of other people is necessary. (and masochists are people too)

Mark Quayle · Apr 22, 2021

Just as the US Declaration of Independence says, 'endowed by the creator', I consider humans to own rights only by dignity offered and deserved from among men, but to be given those rights BECAUSE OF the Creator. That is to say, men do not deserve these rights intrinsically, but because of who made them.

Unfortunately, a theonomy would be too easily perverted into tyranny, which fact the founders knew and avoided with the First Amendment.

Robban · Apr 22, 2021

There are of course firstborn rights which can be forfieted,

as in the event with Reuben.

The Egyptian first born rights were taken away on the night of passover. Both human and cattle.

Egypt can also mean, world, worldly.

This world is the lowliest of all worlds,
inhabited by subjects formed from lowly matter,

dust.
Yet,
"What is man that You think of him."

He owes us nothing.

timothyu · Apr 22, 2021

Mark Quayle said:
That is to say, men do not deserve these rights intrinsically, but because of who made them.

Like the Founders believing only land owners were the entitled ones with permission to vote, etc. ?

essentialsaltes · Apr 22, 2021

Occams Barber said:
What Are Human Rights?
...
I see rights granted to individuals based on societal agreement. I also see rights as a variable commodity based on changing culture norms.

This would be my view as well.

Can we objectively determine what constitutes a ‘human right'?

Since they are human conventions agreed upon within particular societies, they have no objectivity about them.

Are you born with human rights (that is; are they a ‘natural’ part of human nature) or are they created externally?

They are not inherent, like... your stomach or something. They are social conventions. To the extent that 'social' is not 'natural', they aren't natural.

Are human rights really ‘inalienable’? (that is; can’t be taken away)

I have had weird arguments with libertarians and others who say things like "Slaves did indeed have the right to freedom, it was merely infringed by society." I can't wrap my head around that. Before the 19th amendment, women did not have the right to vote in federal elections. Before legal emancipation, slaves did not have some sort of right to freedom. It had been alienated, so it can't have been inalienable. If they had some sort of metaphysical right to freedom, it had no power or effect on their lives. It's equivalent to not existing at all.

Are any human rights universal (that is; apply to all people across all cultures, geography and time?)

I think they both are and aren't, depending on how much you stress 'apply'. I think your analogy to morality is apt. Things that are subjective can nonetheless be universal.

At one point, it was moral and just (within a society) to burn people alive for heresy. Now (I trust) it isn't. But from my perspective, it was never a moral thing to do. They should not have done that. I think slaves should have had their right to freedom. I think women should always have had the vote. If that means these rights 'apply' to them universally, then great. But as I said before, these people did not have those rights. So in that sense, it certainly didn't apply to them.

Clizby WampusCat · Apr 22, 2021

Occams Barber said:
What Are Human Rights?

On CF we occasionally get into discussion about a particular right; usually in a US context. While we may disagree about the particulars of the right under discussion there’s usually tacit acceptance that the right is real and somehow intrinsic to humanity. While we’ve talked about various individual rights, I can’t recall a thread which looked at rights as a concept.

This is a definition of ‘rights’ taken from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

Rights are entitlements (not) to perform certain actions, or (not) to be in certain states; or entitlements that others (not) perform certain actions or (not) be in certain states.

but this doesn’t help in understanding why a particular entitlement qualifies as a right.

Amnesty International, uses a more abstract, romanticised definition in talking about human rights:

The basic freedoms and protections that belong to every single one of us

and goes on to suggest, based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that all human beings are born with ‘equal and inalienable rights and fundamental freedoms.’

Human rights is a wide-ranging topic. To give the thread some direction I’ve tried to reduce it to a number of specific questions.:

Can we objectively determine what constitutes a ‘human right'?

Are human rights a subset of rights in general?

Are you born with human rights (that is; are they a ‘natural’ part of human nature) or are they created externally?

Are human rights really ‘inalienable’? (that is; can’t be taken away)

Are any human rights universal (that is; apply to all people across all cultures, geography and time?)

Note that this thread is about the broad concept of human rights, It’s not focused on US rights in particular nor is it about justifying, or disagreeing with, a specific right, although mentioning a particular right may be useful in illustrating a point.

A Little Light Reading.

Rights (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

What are human rights? – Amnesty International Australia

Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Wikipedia

UDHR-English-Version.pdf (unaa.org.au) (Full Text of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights)

OB

I think it is pretty simple. Our rights in the US are given by the government. We can change them by changing the constitution or laws. How we determine those rights is based on our ideals and what we want the goals of the governments or society to be. I think it should be based on maximizing freedom while protecting everyone rights.

durangodawood · Apr 22, 2021

disciple Clint said:
Human rights are a very real and very Christian concept because the Imago Dei is central to Christian ethics. It’s wrong to murder, to steal, to defraud, and so on because all human beings have an innate value rooted in their nature as image bearers of God. To commit any of these sins against them is not just a crime but an affront to the Holy God who made them in His image. Are Human Rights Christian? - BreakPoint
God set up society in specific ways, many of which are subtle and must be read from context. Historically, these ways have been determined through the observance of nature. When we observe, the "rights" we discover vary depending on who is interpreting nature and how their historical preferences and prejudices influence their judgment. It would be better to go to the Bible. Most of the rights identified by the lifestyle God ordained are not universal—even the ideal situation does not guarantee everyone the opportunity to partake. But, in general, these are situations that God has designed for our benefit. What is a biblical view of human rights?
In the most famous passage of the Declaration of Independence, it is easy to see the connection between theism and human rights: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The Christian Roots of Human Rights

What I'm getting from that is: rights are entirely a matter of faith. There's nothing objectively demonstrable about the reality of rights.

durangodawood · Apr 22, 2021

Occams Barber said:
Thanks Clint.

While your quote argues that human rights are a Christian concept it says nothing about what those rights might be apart from a rather stretched attempt to connect them to the US Declaration of Independence. The author was, very obviously, an American. I'm left with the impression that God's real will (on rights) didn't get expressed until 1776.

If we look at history, as recorded in the Bible, we'll find numerous instances of breaching what we today would take as basic human rights. To me it's a bit of a stretch accommodating Biblical behaviour with our modern understanding of human rights. Even your quote is struggling with justifying this.

OB

Yes. Job was made in the image of God. Where were his rights when he could have used them?

What Are 'Human Rights'

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Christian Spenglerian

Well-Known Member

-----------

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist

-----------

Well-Known Member

Fact-Based Lifeform

Well-Known Member

re Member

re Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency