@Unseen--I've already conceeded that at present I can't substantiate my position on rights--it would be a major undertaking, and it is on my "to do" list. I've stated it, if only to ensure that people will not think that everyone agrees with you.
As to my "scary" statement I should clarify since I misspoke: I don't find the idea scary; I find many of those who hold the idea scary. (The same as with the idea of "god".) Of course my worry about it isn't a proof or evidence. I know that.
On the other hand, all you've done is assert your viewpoint on it, responding separately to everyone who seems not to agree with it, but you are pretending to actually argue for your position. Simply repeating it over and over is not arguing for it, telling my your philosophy class would wipe the floor with me if I were to argue for my position (on a basis I don't actually argue for it on) is also not arguing for your position, it's argument by intimidation.
Let's for the nonce note that we disagree (at least until one of us provides some meat for their argument) and stop butting heads for now.
Legislation or no legislation, if you empower people with education, support and and just bringing the problem to light people will start to take action; especially women. Change does not happen over night, it takes time, work and comittment. You seem to be obssessed with the idea of legislation. Human Rights are not legislated, they are a result of brave people standing up and saying this is wrong and doing what they can to help.
I'm, not obsessed with legislation. I'm practical. Until you have laws, courts, and police power behind you, all you have is rights you wish you had.
A "right" is, effectively, a license, and so must be given to one by another. Hence, back to legislation. Of course, this begs the question of what gives the licensor legitimacy in the first place.
Because of empathy, human rights is culturally transcendent in as much as you can put anybody on the spot by ask them how they'd like to be in the subjugated person's shoes. They might not admit they wouldn't like it but everybody else would know better.
Are you implying that "culturally transcendant" means something? And if it does, that it is in any way other than subjective?
"Oh...like some evil person or group sat down and said, "Let's subvert the will of the individual." Culture is a child of the people as much as vice versa."
Culture is the prison of the people. Culture forces women in theocratic societys, who posses the potential to be doctors or lawyers, or anything they wish, to spend their lives as slaves, Culture turns children into soldiers, money into bullets, and forests into "progress". A person who chooses to cling to the dogma of their culture may find it a steady foundation to stand on, but a person with the courage and intelligence to walk away from their culture might be crushed by that same foundation, pinned to the ground untill death. Also, it really dosent matter if it was designed to oppress people or not, thats what it does, thats the real issue.
"I agree with Sartre. We are "condemned to freedom." We ALWAYS have the option, sometimes unpleasant or even fatal, to do as we please. To think otherwise is an act of bad faith."
I don't agree with Sarte so much, it is order which condems us, freedom is the air we are privileged to breath once we learn to condem order in return. I agree with Niche who said "The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." And I don't think my rights come from legislators, or some far away azathoth, I think they come from my willingness to fight, to the death if nessecary, in order to maintain them.
It's always fun discussing matters of import.
Heck, Hell, we will always have to live with culture and with whatever limitations it imposes on us, unless we wish to defy those limitations, accepting the consequences.
You haven't so much refuted Sartre as reaffirmed him with that Nietzche (correct spelling) quote. In what way is ""The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself" contradictory to or inconguous with my quote from Sartre? I think they work very well together.
" I don't think my rights come from legislators, or some far away azathoth, I think they come from my willingness to fight, to the death if nessecary, in order to maintain them." Rights are either imbued by a divine creator or they are embodied in law. Struggling to be free, and being successful at it has nothing to do with having a right, unless it becomes established not just for you but for all, through legislation.
Sorry I can't resist. The correct spelling is Nietzsche (you dropped the S in your "(correct spelling)")
As for the differences in the quotes, you are right that they are complimentary, but I feel as though they come to the same understanding with differnt directions in regards to conclusin. I feel as though Nietzche is praising the courage of the individual who strikes out, where as Sartre is praising the relative saftey of embracing the heard mentality. Maybe I'm missing his sentament though, but it almost sounds like a threat/warning aginst people who seek freedom.
I agree that law secures freedoms, but I don't think it creates them, people have to demand them to begin with, to reach out and take to such a degree that they can no longer be denied what is rightfully theirs. look at the civil rights movement, or the progress of gays and transgendered people. It started with people breaking the law, and spitting in the face of the established order. I feel in this way, our rights originate on the individual level. We demand the rights, that are then solidified by law. Culture is less logical, and far less humane then law (unless the two are intermingled) Law and culture are seprate entities after all, and often times people break the law to follow culture, look at the KKK for example.
Join Think Atheist
Welcome toThink Atheist
Get Started Nowor Sign In
Or sign in with:
Started by Belle Rose in Biology and Medicine. Last reply by Simon Paynton 3 hours ago.
Started by ProgrammingGodJordan in Small Talk. Last reply by ProgrammingGodJordan 8 hours ago.
Started by Violeta Babacan in Small Talk. Last reply by onyango makagutu 1 hour ago.
Started by ProgrammingGodJordan in Small Talk. Last reply by ProgrammingGodJordan 9 hours ago.
Started by Belle Rose in Biology and Medicine. Last reply by TJ 18 hours ago.
Sunday School January 15th 2017
Sunday School January 8th 2017
Sunday School January 1st 2017
Posted by Brad Snowder on January 14, 2017 at 12:49pm
Posted by Noon Alif on January 10, 2017 at 10:11am
© 2017 Created by umar.
Report an Issue |
Terms of Service
Please check your browser settings or contact your system administrator.