Aswad
Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Zensee Arbitrary has specific legal meanings but in the context of this discussion it is being used to describe the quality of evidence or justification for a particular belief. And in this context, the fact remains that the quality of evidence or justification for beliefs is, in the final analysis, arbitrary- regardless of whether the beliefs are secular or not. There are no intrinsic qualities that inherently justify human rights, and indeed their pan-national acceptance is out of convenience. Describing them as random may not be apt, depending on your views on determinism, but they are merely the product of their time, not anything universally accepted or inherently human that it has simply taken us 200.000 years to come up with. If humans are still around come the next millenium, they will likely regard our present standards as being just as arbitrary and unjust as we now view the standards of the previous millenium. The convenience of government acceptance (I would actually say that pan-governmental is more apt than pan-national) does not provide evidence or justification for the notion that these human rights are universal or intrinsic, and certainly not for the differentiation between humans made therein. While the assertion has not been made, I would also point out that neither is there evidence or justification for these being the totality of human rights, which also supports the notion that they are fairly arbitrary. Perhaps I have used the word incorrectly. It wouldn't be the first time. If so, my apologies. I'd welcome a better word, if there is one; "subjective" seems inadequate. quote:
Discussing common, human affairs in a secular forum is not an arbitrary choice. It is the most fair and respectful choice. Provided the secular forum is secular in the sense of being devoid of religious bias, that may well be the case. If it means being biased toward secularity, that's a different matter. Sort of like atheism vs materialism. quote:
Create some sort of ecumenical / secular Frankenforum - good luck making that fly too. Heh... that's an inherently human thing, more than anything else. Try inviting secular people with a radically different viewpoint, and see the thing come crashing down just as fast. Try inviting religious people who understand the value of cooperation and respect for other people's views and choices, and it works just as well as with secular people. It's a matter of the distance in viewpoints, the ability to focus on the common ground, and the ability to keep an open mind. I have not experienced my religious views as interfering with my ability to reach agreement with others, or my ability to cooperate with others, even in the face of differences of opinion. quote:
Both are thankfully unnecessary. We have a forum for discussing international issues of common, human concern. It's called the UN. Quite. And its efficacy is rather disputed. Health, al-Aswad.
_____________________________
"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind. From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way. We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.
|