[hocndoc]

If I am alone, there is no one to infringe my rights. They are moot, since rights are only relevent as negatives: rights may not be infringed.
Dr. Spitzer calls this the Silver Rule: First do no harm or Non-maleficence.

[beavus]

If I am alone, there is no one to infringe my rights. They are moot, since rights are only relevent as negatives

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?