Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court

Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
165 Posts 14 Posters 4.4k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • J Online
    J Online
    jon-nyc
    wrote on 16 May 2022, 19:57 last edited by jon-nyc
    #92

    Natural rights are not granted by society (government) but inhere to the individual. So what rights inhered to people 30k years ago?

    Or, as I suggested, are “natural rights” to be understood in an “ought” rather than an “is” framework? Something they should be granted?

    Or am I speaking Greek to you?

    Only non-witches get due process.

    • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
    L K 2 Replies Last reply 16 May 2022, 20:05
    • H Offline
      H Offline
      Horace
      wrote on 16 May 2022, 20:00 last edited by Horace
      #93

      Is there a definition of "natural rights" which indicates they are necessarily enforceable? If such rights aren't necessarily enforceable, then we are all free to believe in whatever rights we would like to believe in.

      Education is extremely important.

      1 Reply Last reply
      • J Online
        J Online
        jon-nyc
        wrote on 16 May 2022, 20:03 last edited by
        #94

        Horace agrees with my post that upset Larry so

        Only non-witches get due process.

        • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
        H 1 Reply Last reply 16 May 2022, 20:10
        • J jon-nyc
          16 May 2022, 19:57

          Natural rights are not granted by society (government) but inhere to the individual. So what rights inhered to people 30k years ago?

          Or, as I suggested, are “natural rights” to be understood in an “ought” rather than an “is” framework? Something they should be granted?

          Or am I speaking Greek to you?

          L Offline
          L Offline
          Larry
          wrote on 16 May 2022, 20:05 last edited by Larry
          #95

          @jon-nyc said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:

          Natural rights are not granted by society (government) but inhere to the individual. So what rights inhered to people 30k years ago?

          Or, as I suggested, are “natural rights” to be understood in an “ought” rather than an “is” framework? Something they should be granted?

          Or am I speaking Greek to you?

          I agree with you that natural rights are not granted by government. I disagree with your equating government with society. Societies set up governments, government is not society, and fuck 30,000 years ago. It has nothing to do with anything.

          1 Reply Last reply
          • J Online
            J Online
            jon-nyc
            wrote on 16 May 2022, 20:08 last edited by
            #96

            I was speaking Greek to you apparently. You misunderstood every single sentence.

            Only non-witches get due process.

            • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
            L 1 Reply Last reply 16 May 2022, 20:13
            • J jon-nyc
              16 May 2022, 20:03

              Horace agrees with my post that upset Larry so

              H Offline
              H Offline
              Horace
              wrote on 16 May 2022, 20:10 last edited by Horace
              #97

              @jon-nyc said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:

              Horace agrees with my post that upset Larry so

              I made the same point on april 3. I don't actually consider this distinction between natural rights and socially conferred rights to be meaningful to the discussion, especially after one realizes that natural rights wouldn't extend beyond an ability to try do whatever you want to. But everything else has that right too. So you may get eaten, or put into jail, or whatever.

              Education is extremely important.

              1 Reply Last reply
              • J jon-nyc
                16 May 2022, 20:08

                I was speaking Greek to you apparently. You misunderstood every single sentence.

                L Offline
                L Offline
                Larry
                wrote on 16 May 2022, 20:13 last edited by
                #98

                @jon-nyc said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:

                I was speaking Greek to you apparently. You misunderstood every single sentence.

                Maybe we arent using the same definition of "natural rights".

                J J 2 Replies Last reply 16 May 2022, 20:14
                • J Online
                  J Online
                  jon-nyc
                  wrote on 16 May 2022, 20:13 last edited by
                  #99

                  Well I don’t know how you conceive “inalienable” rights in anything but a normative framework.

                  Because obviously they are all quite alienable and were alienated for most of humanity for most of history.

                  Only non-witches get due process.

                  • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                  H 1 Reply Last reply 16 May 2022, 20:18
                  • L Larry
                    16 May 2022, 20:13

                    @jon-nyc said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:

                    I was speaking Greek to you apparently. You misunderstood every single sentence.

                    Maybe we arent using the same definition of "natural rights".

                    J Online
                    J Online
                    jon-nyc
                    wrote on 16 May 2022, 20:14 last edited by
                    #100

                    @Larry said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:

                    @jon-nyc said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:

                    I was speaking Greek to you apparently. You misunderstood every single sentence.

                    Maybe we arent using the same definition of "natural rights".

                    Then reread my original post maybe you’ll agree with it. It seems objectively true.

                    Only non-witches get due process.

                    • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                    L 1 Reply Last reply 16 May 2022, 21:22
                    • J jon-nyc
                      16 May 2022, 20:13

                      Well I don’t know how you conceive “inalienable” rights in anything but a normative framework.

                      Because obviously they are all quite alienable and were alienated for most of humanity for most of history.

                      H Offline
                      H Offline
                      Horace
                      wrote on 16 May 2022, 20:18 last edited by
                      #101

                      @jon-nyc said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:

                      Well I don’t know how you conceive “inalienable” rights in anything but a normative framework.

                      Because obviously they are all quite alienable and were alienated for most of humanity for most of history.

                      "Do exist, and ought to be enforced". There, done.

                      Education is extremely important.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      • J Online
                        J Online
                        jon-nyc
                        wrote on 16 May 2022, 20:21 last edited by jon-nyc
                        #102

                        You spelled “should exist” wrong.

                        Only non-witches get due process.

                        • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                        H 1 Reply Last reply 16 May 2022, 20:23
                        • J jon-nyc
                          16 May 2022, 20:21

                          You spelled “should exist” wrong.

                          H Offline
                          H Offline
                          Horace
                          wrote on 16 May 2022, 20:23 last edited by
                          #103

                          @jon-nyc said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:

                          You spelled “should exist” wrong.

                          Only if you assume that rights do not exist without enforcement. I make no such assumption.

                          Education is extremely important.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          • J jon-nyc
                            16 May 2022, 19:57

                            Natural rights are not granted by society (government) but inhere to the individual. So what rights inhered to people 30k years ago?

                            Or, as I suggested, are “natural rights” to be understood in an “ought” rather than an “is” framework? Something they should be granted?

                            Or am I speaking Greek to you?

                            K Offline
                            K Offline
                            Klaus
                            wrote on 16 May 2022, 20:28 last edited by Klaus
                            #104

                            @jon-nyc said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:

                            Natural rights are not granted by society (government) but inhere to the individual. So what rights inhered to people 30k years ago?

                            Or, as I suggested, are “natural rights” to be understood in an “ought” rather than an “is” framework? Something they should be granted?

                            The way I see it: You can of course not look at our touch natural rights. You cannot discover them with science.

                            That does not mean they don't exist.

                            My somewhat Schopenhauer-esque take on the issue is that we can "will" natural rights into existence. Each of us makes a choice of whether natural rights exist or not. That's not the same as "should exist".

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            • J jon-nyc
                              16 May 2022, 19:50

                              Ok, then feel free to correct me. What natural rights did Homo Sapiens possess on the savanna 30,000 years ago?

                              I Offline
                              I Offline
                              Ivorythumper
                              wrote on 16 May 2022, 20:31 last edited by
                              #105

                              @jon-nyc said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:

                              Ok, then feel free to correct me. What natural rights did Homo Sapiens possess on the savanna 30,000 years ago?

                              @jon-nyc said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:

                              Natural rights are not granted by society (government) but inhere to the individual. So what rights inhered to people 30k years ago?

                              The same natural rights as all human have. Rights are principally grounded in moral responsibility, since the moral agent must be free to act morally in respect of one's obligations.

                              Obviously systems of governance and law and philosophy have developed which better understand, recognize, and uphold the rights of man than whatever occurred on the plains of Africa 30,000 years ago. But the rights have always inhered in the human person as a moral agent.

                              Or, as I suggested, are “natural rights” to be understood in an “ought” rather than an “is” framework?

                              As the law is ordered to the common good as a matter of justice, and the recognition of natural human rights are required for a just society, the State (those in charge of the community) have the moral obligation to establish laws which respect the natural rights of the members of the society. This is necessary that all members of the society might be able to fulfill their moral obligations to self, family, and society.

                              Something they should be granted?

                              Yes, not only should but the State morally must uphold the natural rights of the members of the society. The validation of the authority, as the raison d'être of the State, is found in the ability to establish, promote, and maintain the common good. The common good is the very order of society which allows for human flourishing.

                              Or am I speaking Greek to you?

                              It's easier in Latin, if you prefer.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              • J Online
                                J Online
                                jon-nyc
                                wrote on 16 May 2022, 20:43 last edited by jon-nyc
                                #106

                                Again that seems obviously false.

                                I mean, how much sense does it make to go to the landfill near an abortion clinic in California and dig up a fetus and tell him he has and had the right to life, it just wasn’t enforced. But - and this is important, Mr Fetus - do rest assured that the right was inalienable.

                                “Inalienable rights are alienable rights” is nonsense. This topic is purely normative.

                                Only non-witches get due process.

                                • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                                I 1 Reply Last reply 16 May 2022, 21:28
                                • H Offline
                                  H Offline
                                  Horace
                                  wrote on 16 May 2022, 20:48 last edited by
                                  #107

                                  "Rights are necessarily enforceable, or they aren't rights" seems like a strange hill to die on. Is there a number of murders per capita allowed before we concede that people don't have a right not to be murdered, after all?

                                  Education is extremely important.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  • J Online
                                    J Online
                                    jon-nyc
                                    wrote on 16 May 2022, 20:52 last edited by
                                    #108

                                    It’s that we recognize that it’s normative. But even in your example it is societally contingent.

                                    Again, imagine 30kya Horace with 4 male relatives waiting patiently for a lion to tire of his kill, so you and your friends could get the scraps. You enjoy it for 30m only to be chased off by hyenas.

                                    What does it really mean to say you had “inalienable rights” granted by your creator?

                                    Only non-witches get due process.

                                    • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                                    H I 2 Replies Last reply 16 May 2022, 20:54
                                    • J jon-nyc
                                      16 May 2022, 20:52

                                      It’s that we recognize that it’s normative. But even in your example it is societally contingent.

                                      Again, imagine 30kya Horace with 4 male relatives waiting patiently for a lion to tire of his kill, so you and your friends could get the scraps. You enjoy it for 30m only to be chased off by hyenas.

                                      What does it really mean to say you had “inalienable rights” granted by your creator?

                                      H Offline
                                      H Offline
                                      Horace
                                      wrote on 16 May 2022, 20:54 last edited by
                                      #109

                                      @jon-nyc said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:

                                      It’s that we recognize that it’s normative. But even in your example it is societally contingent.

                                      Again, imagine 30kya Horace with 4 male relatives waiting patiently for a lion to tire of his kill, so you and your friends could get the scraps. You enjoy it for 30m only to be chased off by hyenas.

                                      What does it really mean to say you had “inalienable rights” granted by your creator?

                                      It means God will not judge you for your failure to not get eaten, and it means that in time, you would contribute your ideas and energies to creating a social framework in which the lion would be prevented from eating you.

                                      Education is extremely important.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      • J jon-nyc
                                        16 May 2022, 20:52

                                        It’s that we recognize that it’s normative. But even in your example it is societally contingent.

                                        Again, imagine 30kya Horace with 4 male relatives waiting patiently for a lion to tire of his kill, so you and your friends could get the scraps. You enjoy it for 30m only to be chased off by hyenas.

                                        What does it really mean to say you had “inalienable rights” granted by your creator?

                                        I Offline
                                        I Offline
                                        Ivorythumper
                                        wrote on 16 May 2022, 21:15 last edited by
                                        #110

                                        @jon-nyc said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:

                                        It’s that we recognize that it’s normative. But even in your example it is societally contingent.

                                        Again, imagine 30kya Horace with 4 male relatives waiting patiently for a lion to tire of his kill, so you and your friends could get the scraps. You enjoy it for 30m only to be chased off by hyenas.

                                        What does it really mean to say you had “inalienable rights” granted by your creator?

                                        I don't think that is an argument against inalienable natural rights. A hyena will do what a hyena will do by instinct. There is no moral act on the part of the hyena. There is no inalienable right to not be eaten by a hyena. There is a natural right to defend yourself from being eaten by a hyena. No one can morally prohibit you from defending yourself against being eaten by a hyena.

                                        Furthermore inalienable rights are not granted by the creator in any positive sense. Rights are said to inhere in moral agents in respect of their moral obligations. As we have both personal and corporate/ social/ civic responsibilities so we have both personal rights and civil rights.

                                        Civil rights might be socially contingent, and obviously admit of a lot of variation in various ages and cultures. Civil rights are generally considered as positive law, though grounded in the natural right the members of the society have toward participation in the good of the society.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        • J jon-nyc
                                          16 May 2022, 20:14

                                          @Larry said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:

                                          @jon-nyc said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:

                                          I was speaking Greek to you apparently. You misunderstood every single sentence.

                                          Maybe we arent using the same definition of "natural rights".

                                          Then reread my original post maybe you’ll agree with it. It seems objectively true.

                                          L Offline
                                          L Offline
                                          Larry
                                          wrote on 16 May 2022, 21:22 last edited by
                                          #111

                                          @jon-nyc said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:

                                          @Larry said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:

                                          @jon-nyc said in Biden to nominate Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to Supreme Court:

                                          I was speaking Greek to you apparently. You misunderstood every single sentence.

                                          Maybe we arent using the same definition of "natural rights".

                                          Then reread my original post maybe you’ll agree with it. It seems objectively true.

                                          No, the more you say the clearer the problem in your logic becomes to me, and the more i disagree with your entire premise. Youre not speaking Greek to me at all. In fact, it is you that lacks understanding. Im just not sure if i want to invest the time and effort into it.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes

                                          101/165

                                          16 May 2022, 20:18


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          101 out of 165
                                          • First post
                                            101/165
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups