Natural Rights VS Man-Made rights: The eternal philosophical discussion.

What? That's a terribly mistaken interpretation of the thinking during the period on the Enlightenment.

 

Well then, feel free to enlighten my incorrect view on the matter. That's what I created this thread to do.

 

Proposing the recognition that all men possessed certain rights, no matter their origin, was not intended to be a license to trample on the rights of others which is what this.....That is, we want our action to be without constraint of the other(in a nutshell)....implies.

 

I don't know how you interpret that to be a "license to trample on the rights of others", rather that inherent social conflict is inevitable when people have competing interests and therefore "rights" in their minds. It would be perfect if everyone's "rights" coincided with the other, everyone basically "stayed in their lane" and thus there would be no trampling.

But it's not a license, it's just a natural conclusion of order(well, my Darwinism is showing.). Even if I wished otherwise, there would be those who'd take that privilege for themselves.

 

Regarding:

With regard to that reasoning for existence, I have to be careful because IMO that drags me close to nihilism(if the only value in existence is derived from man's mind, it's a very easy conclusion that existence is futile.)

I"d say if you are not a nihilist to begin with, you have nothing to worry about. If you are leaning that way, then you might have a problem. Either way, it comes from the mind. Just remember you are in the driver's seat. If you aren't, you might consider therapy of some kind .

Everything in the universe simply IS. But, it's interpretations, it's questions, etc., are all in the mind. And, then there is the old Zen koan which goes something like, if a tree falls in the forest and there is no one to hear it, does it make a sound? (Noting that Im not even certain it's a koan, though it does sound like one. But, the answer is yes). It is easy to get into labyrinths of thought. Ability to think and see clearly is an art known only to the beholder, and such is in the eyes (mind) of the beholder. We can only judge those who have the art mastered by how compelling their discourse is, a plight which rises or falls on the ability of those judging. Some are better at getting to the true nature of things than others. I only say that because of empirical observation tells us that some people are better at some things than others.

 

Nonsense in natural world territoriality rights play a significant role especially in group interactions which are fairly common.

 

Government provides none of our inherent rights, we have these rights simply because we are human. Our Constitutions, both State and Federal LIMIT government, not the People. And certainly government is nowhere assigned the authority, BY THE PEOPLE, to be the bestower of our "rights". Rights that you only hold because government permits it, aren't inherent rights at all.

Remember that WE THE PEOPLE formed our Federal Government, the Federal Government did not form the People.

The Government has no inherent power, it has derived power, and it derives it's power from us. The Power we allow the government to exercise is only JUST power. We have no Lords or Ladies. We have no nobility. No one can pretend that they have an inherent right to rule. Government is only legitimate as long as it continues to hold THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED. Should that be lost, government is then tyrannical and illegitimate.

Tyrannical governments generally all end the same way, the minority that rules the majority is at some point slaughtered by the majority or conquered by a foreign power. Once government loses the consent of the governed, they resort to rule by force. At that point they are riding the tiger, and at some point, they or their descendents will be slaughtered and either conquered from without or overthrown from within.

We are the longest surviving Democracy in existence today, and the longest surviving major nation of any government type. Our Founders and Framers took a few steps further, a system of thought that had been developing in the English speaking world for many centuries and it has produced a stable society unmatched by any other. We talk about "Western" Democracy, but, the long surviving Democracies in the world are in the English speaking world.

Here are the three key sentences, first from the Declaration:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.​

• This tells you where our rights come from, they are innate.
• Why we formed a government, to secure these rights. Note that it does not say grant these rights. A government that has the power to grant rights, also has the power to strip us of those same rights. Our government has no legitimate power to arbitrarily strip rights from law abiding citizens.
• What type of power our government will exercise, JUST power. Only Just power is legitimate power.
• Government power, unlike our rights, is derived, not innate.
• Legitimate Power only comes with our consent. Tyrannical power is by its very nature illegitimate.

Next we go to the Preamble of the Constitution for the 3rd sentence:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
​

Forming a more perfect union, more perfectly securing our rights for more of us is a forever task that we receive from our parents and pass to our children. Just as perfection is infinite, so this task is endless. Properly, we do not sit in judgment over what our parents failed to do, we get up off our asses and get the next step of perfecting done, and trust that our children will do the same. Of course, we should be informing our children of their responsibilities and duties in their formative schooling, but, we have some important ground to make up there.

 

Govt can strip rights anytime it wants.

 

There are no natural rights. It is one of the first lessons every toddler learns.

 

Really? I don't think toddlers get a philosophy major, but that's just me.

 

We have a number of layered safeguards to ensure that government only exercises legitimate and just powers. And when government acts illegitimately, and unjustly we have the tools to restore government to its rightful limited role, but of course government, unchecked, can act unjustly and illegitimately, human history is the history of failed governments. We have the good fortune to be in a system that works very well for us, but, it's our duty to both keep it in check, and to continue the task of more perfectly securing our liberty. Here are some areas of low hanging fruit:

• Our inner cities are lawless hell holes, no American should live like that.
• Our prisons are filled with assault and rape. These are spaces where our Government controls every moment of the lives of the incarcerated and dictates the very space the incarcerated will occupy. Rather than sitting in judgment on our Framers and Founders maybe we should get off our finger pointing asses and clean up our criminal justice system.
• China is marketing slave produced goods, on US shelves, today, some of it is being produced by US based companies. We should get ALL slave produced goods off our markets as rapidly as we would poisoned medicines or foods.

That's enough to keep us busy and progress on these fronts is a noble use of our lives. Our children, when their turn comes, will find other needs and tasks and likewise complete them.

 

The idea of natural rights is just silly to me. As is the cult of the individual. As far as I can tell, humans have always been social animals. Sure, everyone has their personal quirks and whatnot, but within the framework of the social structure. The only rights one has are those conferred by the powers that be. It has long been the politics of liberals to expand those rights to more and more people, the politics of the right, to restrict those rights.

 

On the surface is seems so. .. if one is looking at one particular slice of nature - from a certain perspective.

In nature - species do not generally kill their own - yes it happens - power struggles and so on .. and some Spiders eat their mates . but most species - particularly the non insect kind - and higher order creatures tend not to eat their own too often . .. and logically .. this makes sense from a survival of the species perspective. ..."Survival of the Fittest" is certainly something we have recognized in nature.

So one might claim that there are things in nature that relate to rights - which are not mane made. now we just have to figure out how to relate the above .. to rights .. and we then have "Natural rights".

For this I will get into a Phenomenon related to the one above .. but more specific to humans - who also tend not to eat their own - too often.

Early Humans banded together in groups - they did this for social reasons but, also for protection - from the bad ones who wanted to eat them .. or kill them and take their stuff - rape their wives .. and so on.

So these humans band together for protection - It doesn't do much good if one is protected from the outside - if one is not protected on the inside .. codes of conduct then develop within the group. The groups that give internal protection thrive ..those that do not .. do not.

United we stand - divided we fall .. is doubly true in this instance.

So while these Codes of Conduct were created by man .. they really wern't - they were what follows naturally and logically from the innate desire to be protected from harm .. a Natural Instinct that was not created .. but one you were born with.

Now -- having these codes of conduct doesn't do much good if violators are not punished. .. hence some authority has to be given the power to punish .. and this is the first Gov't.

The above is the basic chapter 1 of the Enlightenment thinkers .. basis of Classical Liberalism - Republicanism - and the founding principles.

 

Post 24 gives my answer to this universal question .. quite sure it was penned prior to Paine .. but that is of no moment .. and you did not claim otherwise..

Was just wondering where I collect my Masters of Philosophy

 

Natural rights don't exist naturally, they are man-made and just renamed to add the illusion of authority.

All rights are man-made. All rights are man-enforced.

 

I would say the Cult of The Poisoned Mind has been very apparent during these last 12 months, but certainly that is not the only cult that exists.

 

I think of the term 'natural rights' in the sense of these rights being innate to you rather than them existing in nature outside of human influence.

 

Then man is also capable of revoking those rights.

 

But they're not. You're not born knowing those rights, they are taught to you by your parents and society.

 

Indeed they can and often do.

 

Describe when human authority is illegitimate and unjust.

 

Unfortunately that is the case.