From: Brett Paatsch (paatschb@ocean.com.au)
Date: Wed Nov 20 2002 - 23:21:22 MST
Thu 21 Nov 3.06 Gordon wrote:
> Jef Allbright wrote:
>
> > Attempts in the past to create a scientific, rational moral code
> > were based on observations of nature, such as "survival of the
> > fittest", which in a sense may be the ultimate natural law, no
> > matter what rules we may make. However this conflicts with
> > (ironically) our evolutionary programming to be compassionate.
>
> I see no conflict here. Nature has selected compassion as a valuable
> trait in humans.
But human compassion does not _naturally_ extend to all humanity. At least
not in the main and/or not yet. (I have some hopes in this regard but my pet
dog means more to me than the 43rd person born in India in the calendar year
1966. I have no real idea at all of that person though I sure he or she must
have existed and possibly continues to live today. That person would have
more in common with me than my pet dog but I can't feel real compassion for
what is to me a statistic. Nor is human compassion necessarily natures last
word on the subject of what works best.
>
> I count myself among those who believe in "natural rights." Our rights
> as humans derive from the law of the jungle, so to speak.
The law of the jungle is constantly being repealed and rewritten.
> I believe errors and confusion (and dismay, as seen here in this thread)
> arise when people start assuming the reality of positive rights, for
> example a "right to health-care" or a "right to an education." (If
> exercising a right requires that others be forced to contribute to your
> life, then it is a positive right.)
I hope I have neither given the impression of dismay, or contributed to
dismay in others.
This distinction you draw between positive and negative rights is
interesting.
I don't think it is negative that you seem to recognize negative rights but
not positive ones in the sense you outline it, but I do wonder how you place
the concept of contracts in your system. If one has contracted in a "free
and open way" to provide or receive services such as education or health
care are these services "positive rights" to your mind or not rights at all?
Brett
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:17 MST