mardi 12 juin 2018

Please Defend Transcendental Human Rights

On this forum, it is common for the concept of human rights to come up. Whether we’re talking about gun ownership, abortion, or privacy, this side discussion is likely to arise, and when it does, it almost always becomes a jumbled mess of people talking past one another. So I’m making this thread as an opportunity for those who believe in transcendental human rights to make their case.

So what exactly are we talking about here? Honestly, I’m not entirely sure, because I don’t believe in transcendental rights, nor do I know precisely what others are referencing when they invoke them. But I can nail down what we are not here to discuss.
  1. Human rights are a government/legal construct. A right is something that I am legally permitted to do. In the United States, I am allowed to voice my displeasure with the government. In North Korea, I do not have that right.
  2. Human rights are certain principles that, when reflected by human actions, tend to enhance prosperity. If we all behave as though humans have a right to bodily autonomy, then we will avoid assaulting one another, and then everyone will be happier and safer as a result.

Almost certainly, most people would agree that both of these concepts of human rights are sound, and so they do not really need to be debated. I am making this thread about “transcendental” rights because there are some people who believe that human rights are something more than the two examples above.

Perhaps these rights are a physical fact of the universe, like the gravitational constant. Maybe they an inherent facet of human nature. Or, they might be special privileges bestowed by God himself.

Whatever the case may be, if you are a proponent of transcendental human rights, then there’s a few questions I’d like you to answer.
  1. Can you give a definition of human rights?
  2. How do you know these rights exist?
  3. The American founding fathers believed that we were all endowed with “certain unalienable rights,” yet they also believed that slave-ownership did not conflict with those rights. How can we pinpoint their error?


via International Skeptics Forum https://ift.tt/2t2TRb0

Aucun commentaire:

Enregistrer un commentaire