Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[<Patrick>]

In case anyone else has noticed, the geo debate boils down to the question of the nature of rights.

So, what are rights?

Are there really any rights?

If there are rights, what is their basis in reality?

[LeopardPM]

rights are agreements (human abstractions) between beings which furthers the net ends of their goals.

rights are not universal in that a being who has never been informed of this 'rights agreement' should not/cannot assume to have knowledge of their existance.

by definition, rights cannot be assigned to beings or objects which cannot agree or reciprocate the agreement (animals have no rights, neither do stones).

well, thats what I think anyways... I just know what I see:
I can claim to have 'Property Rights' but if someone bigger, meaner, badder doesn't believe that I do, then we are back to 'might makes right' - which is why people should never be disarmed.

I can claim to have 'right to Life' but the lion in the jungle does not agree and views me as 'the perfect morsel to feed her cubs' - and she is ultimately correct.


just kitty food,
michael

[<Patrick>]

rights are agreements (human abstractions) between beings which furthers the net ends of their goals.

I agree. Rights are concepts. More specifically, principles.

rights are not universal in that a being who has never been informed of this 'rights agreement' should not/cannot assume to have knowledge of their existance.

It is true that we could not expect someone who has never heard of rights to understand them. However, rights are still valid principles if based on human nature, whether someone is aware of them or not.
 

by definition, rights cannot be assigned to beings or objects which cannot agree or reciprocate the agreement (animals have no rights, neither do stones).

I agree fully. Beings unable to think and reason are unable to grasp concepts. As such, they are incapable of understanding rights - because rights themselves are abstract principles - a type of concept.

well, thats what I think anyways... I just know what I see:
I can claim to have 'Property Rights' but if someone bigger, meaner, badder doesn't believe that I do, then we are back to 'might makes right' - which is why people should never be disarmed.

I can claim to have 'right to Life' but the lion in the jungle does not agree and views me as 'the perfect morsel to feed her cubs' - and she is ultimately correct.


just kitty food,
michael

Meow?

[<Patrick>]

I think the two common errors in regards to rights are these:

1) The mistake of thinking that rights are an intrinsic part of a human being, rather than just concepts - principles of social interaction - derived from human nature.

2) The mistake of thinking that because rights are not an intrinsic part of human nature, they don't exist at all.

[LeopardPM]

they exist as much as 'ownership' exists, or as other 'abstractions' - they are just in our head, but the adherence to these 'principles' brings us all greater prosperity and achievement.

'meow'?

just a sheep in leopard's clothing,
michael

[<Patrick>]

they exist as much as 'ownership' exists, or as other 'abstractions' - they are just in our head, but the adherence to these 'principles' brings us all greater prosperity and achievement.

Exactly what I think...

Where are the defenders of mystical and/or intrinsic rights?? Nobody has come to disagree with us...

[LeopardPM]

<gets gloves on> Bring 'em on!  

[<Patrick>]

Where are they?

[LeopardPM]

me thinks they be scared or perhaps they are, by definition, statists...

[LeopardPM]

take a look at my last post in the 'Ban the land-commies thread:

http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=46;action=display;threadid=5847;start=90

[<Patrick>]

take a look at my last post in the 'Ban the land-commies thread:

http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=46;action=display;threadid=5847;start=90

I knew this whole thing boils down to rights.

[Tracy Saboe]

I happen to believe that we have God-Given rights enshrined in the 10 commandments.

Thou Shalt Not Steal!  This, by itself makes anything but the most ninarchist of governments immoral. (Not Bill's Scheme with the extra "bureuo of land tax redistribution." Georgism is NOT minarchic.)

Thou Shalt not Murder! Ditto

If nobody steals from or murders each other. We'll have liberty. So the Right to liberty is there too.

Tracy

[BillG]

I happen to believe that we have God-Given rights enshrined in the 10 commandments.

Thou Shalt Not Steal!  This, by itself makes anything but the most ninarchist of governments immoral. (Not Bill's Scheme with the extra "bureuo of land tax redistribution." Georgism is NOT minarchic.)

Thou Shalt not Murder! Ditto

If nobody steals from or murders each other. We'll have liberty. So the Right to liberty is there too.

Tracy

mark my words folks...you are going to witness the biggest religious transformation ever documented when Tracy & his cronies privatizes the air by stealing it from us the owners of the commons and then in the name of liberty and free markets allowing people to die because they can't pay their bill!

"Oh well, nature has got to take it's course...if a few unfortunate slackers die along the way well that is just too bad...they deserve it!"

[Tracy Saboe]

Who said I would do it?

Property rights develope through common law, and new technologies. Perhaps it never will be worth it to homestead air,  in which case you have nothing to worry about.

Tracy

[BillG]

Who said I would do it?

Property rights develope through common law, and new technologies. Perhaps it never will be worth it to homestead air,  in which case you have nothing to worry about.

Tracy

The billion dollar (with a "b") question though Tracy is would it be a good idea if you COULD?