Replies

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?

I shouldn't have said that rights are moot when a person is completely isolated. Rights exist and apply in all situations. It is difficult, however to have the problem of infringement of rights when one is completely isolated from all other humans.

Again, I highly recommend Dr. Spitzer's book, where he devotes chapters to the subject of rights. The topic is difficult to cover in this forum.

But, (since I am human), I will try.

We have discussed the difference between humans and all other beings that we know: humans are the species which has a drive or impetus toward unconditional love, beauty, truth, justice and knowledge. As far as we know, this impetus is innate, intrinsic and unconditional in the representatives of the species.

I have the right to live because I am a human, whether anyone else is around or not. Whether we can communicate is irrelevant to the fact that we are human. We are of human origin, that should be sufficient to assume the rights of another, otherwise, we risk doing unconditional harm to human beings by infringing their rights.

Rights are mostly negative. No one may kill another human, because killing him causes unconditional harm: he is no longer living and cannot be restored to life. No one may enslave another human being in such a way that he cannot express his humanity, at the threat of loss of life or self potential, self-direction. So, the right to life is the right not to be killed. The right to liberty is the right not to be enslaved.