| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Negoba 
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5210
|
 Posted: September 20 2010 at 22:00 |
Well Carlin said it better than me - some Sh!t some people made up.
Every one of those definitions falls easily under this line - why - because there is no such things as rights.
"Temporary Priveleges" - that sounds like reality.
|
 |
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 22:05 |
Do you not have a life because someone can take it away from you absent any protection?
Why then is that a valid criticism of rights?
Your definition of rights would be "some sh*t people made up" much more so than mine.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Negoba
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5210
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 22:10 |
|
You have no right to life. you live because of the protection of society.
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 22:16 |
You have no life. You live because no one has killed you yet.
Your argument is absurd.
You don't own a car, because someone would steal it from you in the wild. Please, I'm going to bed. This is ridiculous.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
thellama73
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 22:16 |
 Negoba wrote:
Well Carlin said it better than me - some Sh!t some people made up.
Every one of those definitions falls easily under this line - why - because there is no such things as rights.
"Temporary Priveleges" - that sounds like reality. |
If you believe that rights don't exist, you must also believe that morality and justice don't exist. There's little I can say to that except that I have a different opinion than you. I don't think morality is relative and I think rights exist independent of societies. Because a particular society doesn't recognize certain rights does not mean they don't exist.
|
|
|
|
Negoba
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5210
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 22:22 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
You have no life. You live because no one has killed you yet.Your argument is absurd. You don't own a car, because someone would steal it from you in the wild. Please, I'm going to bed. This is ridiculous. |
It's not absurd to the young black males I work with every day.
Life and right to life are not the same
Edited by Negoba - September 20 2010 at 22:23
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 22:26 |
Negoba wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
You have no life. You live because no one has killed you yet.Your argument is absurd. You don't own a car, because someone would steal it from you in the wild. Please, I'm going to bed. This is ridiculous. |
It's not absurd to the young black males I work with every day.
Life and right to life are not the same |
And it's not absurd to the young black males I work with every day that (x+1)/(x) = 2, but that doesn't make it very true.
No sh*t they're not the same. However, your argument for the denial of the latter can be equally applied to the latter. I'm going to remain under the impression then that you deny life.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Negoba
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5210
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 22:27 |
thellama73 wrote:
Negoba wrote:
Well Carlin said it better than me - some Sh!t some people made up.Every one of those definitions falls easily under this line - why - because there is no such things as rights. "Temporary Priveleges" - that sounds like reality. |
If you believe that rights don't exist, you must also believe that morality and justice don't exist. There's little I can say to that except that I have a different opinion than you. I don't think morality is relative and I think rights exist independent of societies. Because a particular society doesn't recognize certain rights does not mean they don't exist. |
Where does morality come from then?
|
|
WalterDigsTunes
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 11 2007
Location: SanDiegoTijuana
Status: Offline
Points: 4373
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 22:27 |
Negoba wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Negoba wrote:
Well Carlin said it better than me - some Sh!t some people made up.Every one of those definitions falls easily under this line - why - because there is no such things as rights. "Temporary Priveleges" - that sounds like reality. |
If you believe that rights don't exist, you must also believe that morality and justice don't exist. There's little I can say to that except that I have a different opinion than you. I don't think morality is relative and I think rights exist independent of societies. Because a particular society doesn't recognize certain rights does not mean they don't exist. |
Where does morality come from then? |
Metaphysical fantasy land or some dead Greek's cave.
|
|
Negoba
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5210
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 22:30 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Negoba wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
You have no life. You live because no one has killed you yet.Your argument is absurd. You don't own a car, because someone would steal it from you in the wild. Please, I'm going to bed. This is ridiculous. |
It's not absurd to the young black males I work with every day.
Life and right to life are not the same |
And it's not absurd to the young black males I work with every day that (x+1)/(x) = 2, but that doesn't make it very true. No sh*t they're not the same. However, your argument for the denial of the latter can be equally applied to the latter. I'm going to remain under the impression then that you deny life. |
X=1?
Mine have gunshot wounds and dead brothers as evidence.
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 22:32 |
Yes, but I mean they think (x+1)/x = 2 is a tautology because (x+1)/x = x/x + 1 = 1 +1 = 2. It's highly frustrating.
Then it appears reality and your argument are at odds. I suggest you modify one of them.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
thellama73
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 22:35 |
Negoba wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Negoba wrote:
Well Carlin said it better than me - some Sh!t some people made up.Every one of those definitions falls easily under this line - why - because there is no such things as rights. "Temporary Priveleges" - that sounds like reality. |
If you believe that rights don't exist, you must also believe that morality and justice don't exist. There's little I can say to that except that I have a different opinion than you. I don't think morality is relative and I think rights exist independent of societies. Because a particular society doesn't recognize certain rights does not mean they don't exist. |
Where does morality come from then? |
Where does matter come from? Beats me. But it doesn't stop me from believing in matter..
Edited by thellama73 - September 20 2010 at 22:36
|
|
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 22:37 |
In the end it all comes down to one's worldviews and one's upbringing... At times I think some libertarians have their beliefs because they fit their way of life, how they view social interactions, how they want to interact with their environment, and what their past has done in regards to that. The same for every person, of course.
There's no wrongs or rights. No matter the amount of cold logic you can bring to the table, that doesn't mean your view of things is the right one. It might be most logical, maybe. Many people value liberty and freedom above anything else, and their beliefs match that. At least from what you can read on this thread, all libertarians would seem loners who just want to be left alone. (I'm doing a generalization JLocke, and probably a very inaccurate one   ). Of course not all are like that. The same for liberals, broad generalizations can also be made, and what have we accomplished? Nothing. One group values the individual above everything else. The other group puts a big emphasis on society, this abstract that some don't believe should even be used in a conversation. Your views of liberty, freedom and all of that match that view. But other people believe different. Other people believe freedoms can't be absolute for the sake of the greater good. Some people believe there is more freedom in a society where people have, for example, more job securities and safe health care, whereas you would see this as the total opposite of freedom, because for this to happen an entity has to come and "steal" the money that you have earned precisely because you belong to a society (go live in a cage and see if someone pays you.. )
You have an opinion, that's all. A valid one, of course. But don't pretend it's the truth just because you keep saying it. There are multiple truths.
|
|
|
|
thellama73
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 22:37 |
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Yes, but I mean they think (x+1)/x = 2 is a tautology because (x+1)/x = x/x + 1 = 1 +1 = 2. It's highly frustrating.
Then it appears reality and your argument are at odds. I suggest you modify one of them. |
Can't you just substitute any number other than 1 into the equation and show them that it doesn't work?
|
|
|
|
thellama73
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 22:39 |
The T wrote:
At least from what you can read on this thread, all libertarians would seem loners who just want to be left alone. (I'm doing a generalization JLocke, and probably a very inaccurate one ). |
I sure wish you proggers would leave me alone. I keep coming to this forum for some peace and quiet, but there are always so many people posting things to which I need to respond.
|
|
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 22:42 |
thellama73 wrote:
Equality 7-2521 wrote:
Yes, but I mean they think (x+1)/x = 2 is a tautology because (x+1)/x = x/x + 1 = 1 +1 = 2. It's highly frustrating.
Then it appears reality and your argument are at odds. I suggest you modify one of them. |
Can't you just substitute any number other than 1 into the equation and show them that it doesn't work?
|
Yes, but then they don't know what to trust. Which method was right?
Algebra mistakes are so ingrained by the time people reach college that it is very hard to remove their attachment to falsities. It's really exacerbated by the fact that most either refuse to acknowledge the problem or refuse to put in the word to correct it.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 22:43 |
The T wrote:
In the end it all comes down to one's worldviews and one's upbringing... At times I think some libertarians have their beliefs because they fit their way of life, how they view social interactions, how they want to interact with their environment, and what their past has done in regards to that. The same for every person, of course.
There's no wrongs or rights. No matter the amount of cold logic you can bring to the table, that doesn't mean your view of things is the right one. It might be most logical, maybe. Many people value liberty and freedom above anything else, and their beliefs match that. At least from what you can read on this thread, all libertarians would seem loners who just want to be left alone. (I'm doing a generalization JLocke, and probably a very inaccurate one ). Of course not all are like that. The same for liberals, broad generalizations can also be made, and what have we accomplished? Nothing. One group values the individual above everything else. The other group puts a big emphasis on society, this abstract that some don't believe should even be used in a conversation. Your views of liberty, freedom and all of that match that view. But other people believe different. Other people believe freedoms can't be absolute for the sake of the greater good. Some people believe there is more freedom in a society where people have, for example, more job securities and safe health care, whereas you would see this as the total opposite of freedom, because for this to happen an entity has to come and "steal" the money that you have earned precisely because you belong to a society (go live in a cage and see if someone pays you.. )
You have an opinion, that's all. A valid one, of course. But don't pretend it's the truth just because you keep saying it. There are multiple truths. |
That's just your opinion.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 22:45 |
Negoba wrote:
Where does morality come from then? |
Human beings. However, I think it is obvious that the majority of sane human beings in sane societies end up agreeing on a whopping 99% of what is moral and what is not. The little stuff in between can be disagreed with, but the large majority is commonly accepted. Same deal with what rights are, in my opinion. Sure, somebody wrote them down on paper and declared them as 'rights', therefore you could say that was 'making them up'. But if I wanted to, I could walk out of my house right now, drive to a tall, tall bridge, and push that car over the egde for no reason. I can do that, and nobody can stop me without some sort of force. Whether you want to call it freedom, a right, or anything else, the fact that I am able to do it doesn't change. The term 'rights' was made up. The rights themselves are established by societies. It's more complex than what you are talking about, I feel.
Anyway. I think Carlin was speaking more on the limitations of rights than rights themselves. He even said at the end, ''I have the right to do whatever the f**k I want, and if you don't like what I do, you have the right to kill me.'' Yes, man has established his rights. But does that make them unimportant or irrelevant?
But I guess if you wanna get really wild about it, you could take my comment about agreement in sane societies and ask me 'what is sane, really? Where did sanity come from?' 
Edited by JLocke - September 20 2010 at 22:47
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: September 20 2010 at 22:46 |
Actually, Teo, I am a bit of a loner. This is actually one of the few times I fall into the generalizations you make about us Libertarians. But surely you know my passionate debates on here come from more than just a desire to be left alone.
Edited by JLocke - September 20 2010 at 22:50
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: September 21 2010 at 01:58 |
JLocke wrote:
Negoba wrote:
Where does morality come from then? |
Human beings. However, I think it is obvious that the majority of sane human beings in sane societies end up agreeing on a whopping 99% of what is moral and what is not. The little stuff in between can be disagreed with, but the large majority is commonly accepted. Same deal with what rights are, in my opinion. Sure, somebody wrote them down on paper and declared them as 'rights', therefore you could say that was 'making them up'. But if I wanted to, I could walk out of my house right now, drive to a tall, tall bridge, and push that car over the egde for no reason. I can do that, and nobody can stop me without some sort of force. Whether you want to call it freedom, a right, or anything else, the fact that I am able to do it doesn't change. The term 'rights' was made up. The rights themselves are established by societies. It's more complex than what you are talking about, I feel.
Anyway. I think Carlin was speaking more on the limitations of rights than rights themselves. He even said at the end, ''I have the right to do whatever the f**k I want, and if you don't like what I do, you have the right to kill me.'' Yes, man has established his rights. But does that make them unimportant or irrelevant?
But I guess if you wanna get really wild about it, you could take my comment about agreement in sane societies and ask me 'what is sane, really? Where did sanity come from?' |
I think you're wrong. I think morality and rights have nothing to do with society, but began with family and in the beginning family was the largest social group we belonged to (which is why the bibble stresses family connections and genealogies) - all families have a hierarchy of authority and limitations on what members of that family can and cannot do, that hierarchy also defines what is acceptable (ie right and wrong). Within those limitations the patriarch/matriarch will grant accession of rights to offspring who have earned privileges, either on merit or on seniority - if you do your chores you can play; when you're older you can stay out 'till 11, etc.. Over time families grew into extended families, then into tribes, villages, towns, cities and countries - and through those stages of development the basic ideas of what is right and wrong (morality) and what you can and cannot do (rights) have become more formalised, but otherwise remained unchanged.
|
|
What?
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Freedom of Speech...should it be above everything?
