so are there revelations being made in this thread
epiphanies?
I'm kind of having a mini one about the nature of sovereignty and the character of the state but I'm not quite ready to write it down
that sounds like some heavy shit for a sunday afternoon
ps i'm thinking about buying a book of essays by dave kopel
this is related to you because he does some lawyering
it is but I'm not going to spend the day doing anything else so
if rights don't occur naturally then they're the product of the existence of states, or as someone said earlier, "they are what we say they are"
that being the case, it seems like they would generally be granted by the sovereign
but what if you're a Jeffersonian (just for the sake of argument here) and your claim is that sovereignty actually belongs to the people who have to consent to be governed? Would that be functionally different from rights granted by the sovereign?
If not, then legal rights are just the relationship between the people who claim them and the state
Doesn't this work for any two people or groups of people? Would you describe the way I form a relationship with a corporation (buying things, working for them) our rights? (mine and the corporation's)
If that is so, what makes the state qualitatively different from any other group?
Teefs I don't get it, do you think rights per se are dumb and awful
or just that they're a joke because they're never upheld and respected the way they should be?
I think the concept is that there are no natural rights (as defined by "enlightenment" thinking).
All rights are guaranteed within a sociological/cultural structure.
well, teefs' idea anyway
it's basically a roundabout way to espouse you don't think a terrorist is all that bad using comparative reasoning
for example, i remember her telling me that the russian train bombing thing, they had it comin
i look at it on a base, clinical level. that's retarded. crazy people bomb things. i mean, you can assign an ideology to something but at the end of the day your brain is a brain that went ahead one day and decided that bombing an area full of innocent people was a Sane Decision
Uh... no, not at all.
I actually agree with Teefs on this one. Morals and "rights" are assigned on a social and cultural level. There is no universal baseline.
That does NOT, however, mean that they are any less meaningful or powerful. In fact, I would argue that it is because they are a product of our society that they are so powerful. We have, as a community of almost 6 billion, decided that certain things are just not acceptable to us. That, to me, has way more impact than it just being sort of part of the way things are (even though there is no evidence to support that).
In fact, if you attribute rights and morals to some natural or predestined cause you are, I believe, more likely to ignore when they are stepped on/overreached. Because, hey, they'll always be there because they're part of reality! No, they aren't; they are part of our society and we need to be constantly vigilant that our society continues to hold them to be rights.
Moral relativism (I hate that term) isn't a justification for atrocious acts; it's merely an identification as to the role society plays within the formation of worldview.
in practice and in conversation with teefs a different picture is painted. i don't think moral relativism is a justification for atrocious acts either, i think the usage with any given person varies, and varies wildly with teefs
Muse Among MenSuburban Bunny Princess?Its time for a new shtick Registered Userregular
edited May 2010
Yeah, I heard that.
I preferred the sexy lady as our national personification. Her name was Columbia, which I could see as being a bit confusing. Currently I suppose Lady Liberty makes more sense, seeing as Columbia has largely faded from public consciousness. Or give Uncle Sam a makeover already.
I imagine Canada as being represented by a mountie
Posts
What spring does with the cherry trees.
is blowing up innocent people okay if the culture is alien enough?
not trying to troll you, I just want some clarification
Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
I don't think anyone has a satisfactory answer to this question, for what its worth
it is but I'm not going to spend the day doing anything else so
this is what my mind does when it is bored
in practice and in conversation with teefs a different picture is painted. i don't think moral relativism is a justification for atrocious acts either, i think the usage with any given person varies, and varies wildly with teefs
well, his logic isn't internally consistent either so selective quoting and fixing the gaps might actually be a point in her favor
It is kind of interesting and kind of weird. Hmm.
even broadly
chomsky is pro-enlightenment, believes that america has done more than any country for human rights, is pro-science, anti-'post-modernist'
I think I've seen the original in my world history class, yes
Except not nearly as fat
Amazon Wishlist: http://www.amazon.com/BusterK/wishlist/3JPEKJGX9G54I/ref=cm_wl_search_bin_1
I'm switching back and forth between "intellectual exercise" and "olol" pretty quickly right now, but that comment was definitely the latter
mostly
I preferred the sexy lady as our national personification. Her name was Columbia, which I could see as being a bit confusing. Currently I suppose Lady Liberty makes more sense, seeing as Columbia has largely faded from public consciousness. Or give Uncle Sam a makeover already.
I imagine Canada as being represented by a mountie
Mexico as the man on the Tapatio hot sauce battle
and North Korea as Bert.
Amazon Wishlist: http://www.amazon.com/BusterK/wishlist/3JPEKJGX9G54I/ref=cm_wl_search_bin_1
I don't even know . . .
Dudes, what are the national personifications of other countries?
why british dudes got them receding hairlines
damn, justice be blind
Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
britannia:
Hahahahaha
Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
I'm almost there
Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
Liberty, eh, not so much.
What spring does with the cherry trees.
for the most part
american history is just european history
then if i want to find out about my peoples' history then i need to go get a book about german history
and no colonization
just killing brown people
Well maybe she does a bit
her hat is roman, they invaded and influenced us
trident to do with ruling the seas? or maybe its a big fork
I'm drawing blanks at the wheelchair though.
the hat is greek
thats why she doesn't make sense!
Erm.
What spring does with the cherry trees.