Subject:
|
Matthew jumps in (was Re: Goodness of Man?, etc.)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 6 Jan 2000 17:14:13 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
mattdm@mattdm.orgSTOPSPAM
|
Viewed:
|
1878 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> wrote:
> Again, from my perspective, no one refuted that position using a
> property rights based argument. My adversaries in the debate merely
I don't understand the basis for the assertion that property rights are the
basis for all other rights. Where do property rights come from? What makes
that a privledged right above any other I can imagine?
Arguments for this I've seen that I don't buy:
1. It's self evident.
Not to me it's not. Let's see some justification.
2. It's the way it was in the State of Nature.
Really? When was that exactly? I'd like to see some historical records
from the time. Seriously, and more importantly, why property rights in
specific? Without some basis, this just comes back to argument #1.
3. I can build a rational system which derives all other rights I want to
support from this one.
Several problems here.
First, just because you can build such a structure doesn't say anything
about the strength of its foundations. For example, one can build various
non-euclidean geometries from directly contradictory axioms, and they're
all self-consistent and rational.
Second, it's used in a disturbingly circular way: only those (potential)
rights which support the premise are taken to be "real". So of course
those support the premise. If someone says "Well, what about right to
health care? Can't derive that from property rights!", you say "I
know!".
Third, it's not satisfying because it's nice for rights-based arguments
to be seperate from utilitarian arguments. You implied in a post just a
few hours ago that there's a distinction. Not if you're supporting
property rights with this argument there isn't.
4. No one can show me anything better.
Not necessarily true (I'll happily get into that later), but even then,
so what? Doesn't absolve you of the burden of proof.
--
Matthew Miller ---> mattdm@mattdm.org
Quotes 'R' Us ---> http://quotes-r-us.org/
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
188 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
|
|
|
|
