3 ms·
The understanding that rights aren't somehow magical or special, and are just liberties we've decided we like especially well, is surprisingly uncommon, at leas
by ashark 9y ago
The understanding that rights aren't somehow magical or special, and are just liberties we've decided we like especially well, is surprisingly uncommon, at least among Americans. I blame founder/constitution-veneration and all the just-so fables produced by enlightenment political philosophers (I'm looking at you John Locke).
- lkrubner 9y ago> are just liberties we've decided we like especially well Why do we like them? Why wouldn't we prefer to be slaves? Where do our modern intuitions about rights come from? Whatever the origin of the "like especially well" that you mention, that origin seems fundamental. If you study all the peasant revolts, going back thousands of years, you'll note how naturally people invent the language of rights -- it seems to arise spontaneously during each revolt. And why do people revolt? You can't simply assume that they don't like being raped and enslaved -- you have to explain why they don't like being raped and enslaved. And whatever your explanation is of their feelings, that is the origin of rights.
- ashark 9y ago> And why do people revolt? Relative deprivation? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_deprivation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_deprivation
- giergirey 9y agoRelative deprivation certainly seems a better explanation than requiring some mysterious "fundamental universal rights" that people never knew they had until 18th Century Westerners discovered them. Maybe they're a bit like "souls" for atheists?
- dragonwriter 9y agoWell, fundamental human rights were, by the 18th century "discoverers", usually attributed to endowment by a Divine Creator, so maybe not particularly "for atheists". But, yeah, they are certainly non-physical non-demonstrable entities that are presumed to exist based on faith alone.