So where are we now. Rights apply only to situations of at least two interacting things that each hold values and conceptualize? Is it safe to assume that the two or more things interacting must have some way of perceiving and affecting each other's conceptions and values--like communication, for instance?
Seems reasonable as far as it goes. It describes a situation where rights exist, some necessary conditions, but it doesn't really define what we mean by "rights".
We have a simple situation (2 things as above). How does the notion of rights emerge from such a situation?