To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 11301
11300  |  11302
Subject: 
Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Mon, 2 Jul 2001 12:11:14 GMT
Viewed: 
732 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford writes:

How dependent on mutualism do we want to say that rights are?  The 'right' • that
I cite for the cock of the walk isn't a mutually applicable right, it is a
privilege that they all happen to agree on.  And it's based mostly on the • fact
that that chicken will kill whoever disagrees.  That makes it sound
substantially different than our notion of rights.

But you could argue that rights we've given to ourselves are just privileges
that we all happen to agree on. Based mostly on the fact that we'll sue • whoever
disagrees. 8?)

Your emoticon implies that you're kidding.  I'm not.  I think your statement
cuts right to the hear of what our rights actually are.  But the difference I
was pointing to is that we don't invest rights in certain classes of people and
not others.  Except when we do.  But at least we pretend that we don't.

And how does interspecies (or even intercultural) understanding and respect
affect rights?  Do rights mean anything between species?  If not, how and why
is it different for the cross-cultural divides?

I think "rights" has no real meaning or usefulness between species - it makes
no more sense for me to talk about the cock's right to scratch where it wants
than for the cock to crow about the bee's right to eat pollen. I think rights
only make sense within species. Cocks may not call them rights, but they exist
nonetheless.

Not sure about cultures, though humans seem to be heading towards more common
rights across cultures (albeit slowly).

I agree that one primary global culture is the inevitable outcome of rapid
global communications and media.  And I suspect in fifty years the world will
be a very different place.  But there will be some hold outs.  Pockets of
people with non standard cultural mores.  What will we say about their rights?

Chris



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
 
(...) that (...) But you could argue that rights we've given to ourselves are just privileges that we all happen to agree on. Based mostly on the fact that we'll sue whoever disagrees. 8?) (...) I think "rights" has no real meaning or usefulness (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

244 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR