Rights From Wrongs

Page 4 of 6<123456>
October 3rd, 2020 at 5:43:52 PM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 146
Posts: 25010
double.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
October 3rd, 2020 at 6:40:32 PM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 67
Posts: 7596
Quote: Evenbob
He's discussing them and then rejecting
them. He makes it very clear rights come
from us, not nature or some god.


He also, at least from what I have read so far, makes it clear that rights are not man made and is searching for something to ground them in such as our shared experiences of wrong.

I wonder if he will try to explain why some things are universally considered wrong?
“It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” (
October 3rd, 2020 at 7:08:05 PM permalink
aceofspades
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 83
Posts: 2019
Quote: FrGamble
He also, at least from what I have read so far, makes it clear that rights are not man made and is searching for something to ground them in such as our shared experiences of wrong.

I wonder if he will try to explain why some things are universally considered wrong?


Padre I do not believe there is anything that is "universal" - you can find cultures or tribes wherein things we would deem unspeakable are part of their daily existence (e.g. cannibalism)
October 3rd, 2020 at 7:49:41 PM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 146
Posts: 25010
Quote: FrGamble
He also, at least from what I have read so far, makes it clear that rights are not man made


The first line of chapter 4 is "rights do
not come from god or from nature."
What part of that is unclear. He spent
the first 3 chapters explaining why.
He'll spend the rest of the book telling
us where they do come from.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
October 4th, 2020 at 1:02:49 PM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 67
Posts: 7596
Chapter 4 which begins with the question, "If rights do not come from God or from nature, where else could they come from?" is my favorite chapter so far. He introduces us to Ronald Dworkin. In reading Dershowitz's summary of his theory and his critiques of it I got the strong feeling that we might be reading the wrong book. Dworkin's work and contribution to this question are amazing and there is lots that Dershowitz and he agree with (and myself as well).

Quoting Dworkin on page 40,"Plainly any rights-based theory must presume rights that are not simply the product of deliberate legislation or explicit social custom, but are independent grounds for judging legislation and custom." Rights are to Dworkin, "political trumps held by individuals," which necessarily exist outside of the positive law, because people have "moral rights against their governments."
The key to this, which Dershowitz agrees with is the equality of human persons. I think that is excellent.

The disagreement Dershowitz has with Dworkin seems to be two-fold. Dworkin believes that this equality of human persons is a discovery and Dershowitz claims it is an invention. Secondly Dworkin holds that these rights of human beings are inviolable and not subject to the test of utility, Dershowitz disagrees.

First to support his claim that the equality of human persons is an invention and not a discovery the author points to history. He continues to rely on very modern examples of how human beings learned this equality through the mistakes of things like the holocaust. That doesn't hold water for me. Did things like chattel racial slavery and the holocaust teach us by their evil that human beings were equal? I think not. It brought home that truth to us but it was not invented at this time. The equality of human persons is a universal truth we discovered long ago and continue to sin against it. I agree with Dworkin on this point.

Secondly to support his claim that utility is a check even on these fundamental rights of human equality the author points out that experience of cultures and societies throughout history that did not recognize human equality "end up with dissatisfaction, disorder, and violence" and he concludes, "Decent human beings invented the counter intuitive right to equal treatment as a mechanism for avoiding recurrence of the wrongs of unequal treatment - wrongs we now recognize to be immoral." (pg. 44) I find this hypocritical of Dershowitz who in the last chapter ridiculed King David for saying the same thing in Psalm 37. In placing utility as a test for rights that do not come from God, natural law, or positive law but are a "trump card of the individual over governments" he is only holding open the door for abuse and exploitation. Does Dershowitz really believe what he claims that history shows us that anyone who denies human equality descends into chaos and violence? If so that why fall back on some utility test giving those in power to say, "We know what is really best for society as a whole so we are abrogating your equality here and there." Again I think Dworkin comes out way on top here.
“It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” (
October 4th, 2020 at 2:52:23 PM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 146
Posts: 25010
Quote: FrGamble
Does Dershowitz really believe what he claims that history shows us that anyone who denies human equality descends into chaos and violence?


Of course. There is a ton of
history to back it up and it
makes perfect logical sense.
There is zero proof, and it's
illogical, that there is some
'force' out there that has set
up 'universal truths' that guide
us. That's just an invention of
radical intellectuals who want
to control people with religion.

I watch Blue Bloods a lot and
it's a very Catholic show. They
go to their priest or monsignor
sometimes for guidance. The
amount of store they put in
the words of these men is
frightening. That's because
they were taught at an early age
to have way too much confidence
in the advice these men give.

I know it's a fictional show, but
I suspect the Catholic's writing
it have toned it down from the
way it is in real life.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
October 4th, 2020 at 7:37:18 PM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 67
Posts: 7596
Quote: Evenbob
Of course. There is a ton of
history to back it up and it
makes perfect logical sense.


Bob, not sure how this advances the discussion. The author, myself, and obviously you agree with this. Like you said it is a historical fact that when human equality is not respected and not valued as a right society spirals downward. We need only to look around to see that. Maybe take a break from the religion bashing and engage with the book or respond to my comments where you disagree instead of where we agree.
“It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” (
October 4th, 2020 at 10:12:52 PM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 146
Posts: 25010
Quote: FrGamble
Maybe take a break


Sorry, I didn't realize you were
in charge here. My mistake,
carry on. I'll just read the
comments and not respond,
I don't want to break any of
your rules.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
October 4th, 2020 at 10:19:22 PM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 67
Posts: 7596
Come on man, don't be that way. I'm not in charge, I'm just saying there are plenty of other threads you can bash religion and list after windmills. This is a book study thread that others might find interesting. Do you notice that when we get caught up talking to each other we drive all the other posters away? Attack me and my faith somewhere else, I'll respond. Attack or support the book or comments about the book here. Please!
“It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” (
October 5th, 2020 at 7:37:01 PM permalink
aceofspades
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 83
Posts: 2019
Padre - I am wondering if your devout faith is causing you to see arguments that are not there (in the book)?
Page 4 of 6<123456>