Hey FrGamble!

There are lots of problems with thinking that human rights come from or evolve from rational negotiation or education. First of all nothing grounds these human rights and they are changeable. People without education or rational negotiation between people with power make it easy to say violence is a moral good or the oppression of a certain people is a good thing. Human rights based in this way are also changeable. Racial slavery according to this theory was once a moral good, but now we know better. Does that mean the slave owners did nothing wrong. In Germany rational negotiation in the halls of power led to the final solution, was that a moral good or respecting human rights according to your thought? You also have no universal acceptance. Your education might be very different that someone else's and what you think is rational might not be. Does that mean that morality is really broken down to different areas or neighborhoods where in one place something is a human right and another place it is not. It just doesn't hold water. If human rights are so important, and they are, then they need to be grounded is something less wishy washy than based on education or what rational people negotiate or determine for themselves.

Quote: FrGamble

There are lots of problems with thinking that human rights come from or evolve from rational negotiation or education. First of all nothing grounds these human rights and they are changeable. People without education or rational negotiation between people with power make it easy to say violence is a moral good or the oppression of a certain people is a good thing. Human rights based in this way are also changeable. Racial slavery according to this theory was once a moral good, but now we know better. Does that mean the slave owners did nothing wrong. In Germany rational negotiation in the halls of power led to the final solution, was that a moral good or respecting human rights according to your thought? You also have no universal acceptance. Your education might be very different that someone else's and what you think is rational might not be. Does that mean that morality is really broken down to different areas or neighborhoods where in one place something is a human right and another place it is not. It just doesn't hold water. If human rights are so important, and they are, then they need to be grounded is something less wishy washy than based on education or what rational people negotiate or determine for themselves.

Human rights evolved from self-interest

For example, nobody wants to be in pain so there are human rights re: torture

Quote: FrGamble

There are lots of problems with thinking that human rights come from or evolve

No there isn't. It's basically the Golden
Rule, which goes back thousands of
years in cultures all over the planet.
Treat others how you want to be
treated is the core of it. It's a human
right to be treated as civilly as you
treat others. Don't do to others
anything you don't want done to
you.

Yes the Golden rule is a good one and as you admit it has always been around, it didn't evolve or was negotiated. It is a universal and objective truth.

Another problem you might want to try and address is if the Golden Rule has been around for thousands of years, why do we have such trouble following it?

Quote: FrGamble

it didn't evolve or was negotiated.

Of course it was. It was arrived
at logically, as is obvious.

Quote:

why do we have such trouble following it?

Because we are selfish self
centered jerks. We are barely
one step above animals. Ever
own a pet? They only care about
themselves, they always come
first in every situation. Our
natural instincts tell us to do
the exact same thing, we have
to fight it every inch of the
way. It's obvious we're
surrounded by people who
lost the fight and gave up.

Quote: Evenbob

Of course it was. It was arrived
at logically, as is obvious.

Almost as if it was unchangeable and from above.

Quote:

Because we are selfish self
centered jerks. We are barely
one step above animals. Ever
own a pet? They only care about
themselves, they always come
first in every situation. Our
natural instincts tell us to do
the exact same thing, we have
to fight it every inch of the
way. It's obvious we're
surrounded by people who
lost the fight and gave up.

We should move this comment into the "Original Sin" thread, it is perfect there. Thanks.

Quote: FrGamble

Almost as if it was unchangeable and from above.

No. Almost like if you live around
other people long enough you
draw the same conclusions.
Leave me alone and I'll leave
you alone. It's pure logic,
and disobeyed by almost
everyone including your
church. They might be the
biggest violators, forcing their
beliefs on people for 1000
years. It's what tyrants seeking
power always do, and none
was more systematically tyrannical
than the Catholic Church.

According to your logic maybe the Church's understanding of human rights evolved and at the time that you say these things happened. Does that mean when people did things like this in the past that according to you it was okay? If tyrants rationally negotiate that their rights are more important than others does that mean they are still wrong?

Quote: FrGamble

According to your logic maybe the Church's understanding of human rights evolved

The Catholic Church was in a unique position after it
became the Church of Rome. It was the world's first
real corporation, with a board of directors, a CEO, and
a plan for expansion. Here were all these smart man
basically surrounded on all sides by blithering idiots.
So as is human nature they took the path of least
resistance and just bulldozed their way to success.
There's nothing they didn't or wouldn't do to get to
the top of the heap. God had nothing to do with any
of it. It is now and always has been about power. For
a thousand years there was nothing more powerful
in the world then the church.

Quote: FrGamble

.... If tyrants rationally negotiate that their rights are more important than others does that mean they are still wrong?

You mean like in the Catholic church where men have decided women don't have the right to hold jobs as priests?