Subject:
|
Re: Nature of rights? (was: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 2 Jul 2001 23:26:52 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
830 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton writes:
> The presupposing question is, what *is* a right? I believe Mill defined a
> right as (loosely quoted) 'that which others would defend for me in my being
> consciously deprived of'.
I was off by a bit:
"To have a right ... is ... to have something which society ought to defend
me in the possession of."
And also:
"When we call anything a person's right, we mean that he has a valid claim
on society to protect him in the posession of it, either by the force of law
or by that of education and opinion. If he has what we consider a sufficient
claim, on whatever account, to have something guaranteed to him by society,
we say that he has a right to it."
(John Mill's _Utilitarianism_)
DaveE
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
|
|
