The March Philosophy Book of the Month is Final Notice by Van Fleisher. Discuss Final Notice now.

The April Philosophy Book of the Month is The Unbound Soul by Richard L. Haight. Discuss The Unbound Soul Now

The May Philosophy Book of the Month is Misreading Judas by Robert Wahler.

Human Rights- A Challenge for the Forum

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"); such homework-help-style questions can be asked and answered on PhiloPedia: The Philosophy Wiki. If your question is not already answered on the appropriate PhiloPedia page, then see How to Request Content on PhiloPedia to see how to ask your informational question using the wiki.
Post Reply
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 2159
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Human Rights- A Challenge for the Forum

Post by Belindi » May 9th, 2018, 3:42 am

Dachsund, inherited wealth should be redistributed more than at present. The British monarchy now (and from George V to the present )is probably worth what we the subjects pay for its upkeep. Elizabeth II is very good at queening. The British monarchy has what power it has by consent of the people.

Regarding chivalry, your rampant hostility towards women's emancipation surprised me a little. What would you have --- Kinder, Kuche, Kirche?

Chivalry got up to date with two lasting effects. One, which I like, is that gallantry is unisex. The other, which I like less although it was necessary for economic development, is that romantic love was harnessed to the new industrialisation and urbanisation process so that old traditional family and tribal loyalties would be diminished as individualism served geographical mobility.

Londoner
Posts: 1783
Joined: March 8th, 2013, 12:46 pm

Re: Human Rights- A Challenge for the Forum

Post by Londoner » May 9th, 2018, 11:19 am

Dachshund wrote:
May 8th, 2018, 11:27 am
Put briefly, the principle of "prescription" entails a presumption in favour of long-standing institutions and customs. When Burke argues that the traditional authority and privileges of an inherited British Crown are prescriptive, he means they reside solely in the fact that they have existed time out of mind. The institution of an hereditary monarchy in Britain's constitution was, that is, one which had emerged slowly over the centuries as a result of countless, small, prudential judgements; given this, it therefore embodied an acquired wisdom that was superior to any alternative rational plan that might be conceived by the design of one, or even by the design of a single generation. Thus, the principle of prescription justifies a legitimate , natural and dutiful reverence for the ancient institution of the hereditary British Crown, simply because it has endured for the length of time that it has and always rendered sound, satisfactory service to the State through the ages.
I am baffled how anyone who owned a history book could think the British hereditary monarchy 'had emerged slowly over the centuries as a result of countless, small, prudential judgements' On the contrary, it has swung backwards and forwards from near irrelevance to dictatorship accompanied by civil wars and coups. If there has been comparative calm over the last few centuries, it is because the monarchy has been squeezed out of politics.

Every head of state likes to wrap themselves in the trappings of history. Tradition is both aggrandising and reassuring. Change is scary. But change is reality.

Dachshund
Posts: 512
Joined: October 11th, 2017, 5:30 pm

Re: Human Rights- A Challenge for the Forum

Post by Dachshund » May 10th, 2018, 4:42 am

Belindi wrote:
May 9th, 2018, 3:42 am
we the subjects
Tell me, Belinda, are you content, generally speaking, with your own subordination in the official status you bear as a (mere) subject of the British Crown? That is, are you happy to be a humble subject of Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II, in all her imposing magnificence and gracious superiority?

Dachshund

User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1122
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Human Rights- A Challenge for the Forum

Post by ThomasHobbes » May 10th, 2018, 5:35 am

Dachshund wrote:
March 26th, 2018, 3:33 am
In my opinion, this is utter nonsense. I absolutely do not subscribe to the view that such a thing as human dignity exists in the sense that it is a real, inviolable, non-fungible, absolute normative property possessed in the same measure by all human beings. In terms of their fundamental moral status, the idea that all people are inherently and unconditionally dignified in the sense that they are - each and every one - endowed with the same basic measure of worth or value, and are thereby unconditionally entitled to be accorded respect, is, as far as I am concerned, a ridiculous, radical , egalitarian ethical theory that is impossible to justify.

Regards,

Dachshund
Rights do not exist in any sense that you seem be reaching for. Rights are aspirations. And as such they are notions; notions which are offered to each as a ideal.
The assertion of such rights is of benefit to yourself as much as any other. This has nothing to do with egalitarianism, and I assume this is the real concept that you find so objectionable.
In rejecting the UDHR, are you also going to deny that others have any obligation to treat you with any respect of dignity?
So let's unpack who it is exactly you think that does not deserve to be treated with respect? And what other rights and protections would you deny them?

User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1122
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Human Rights- A Challenge for the Forum

Post by ThomasHobbes » May 10th, 2018, 5:36 am

Belindi wrote:
May 9th, 2018, 3:42 am
Dachsund, inherited wealth should be redistributed more than at present. The British monarchy now (and from George V to the present )is probably worth what we the subjects pay for its upkeep. Elizabeth II is very good at queening. The British monarchy has what power it has by consent of the people.
When were you ever asked?

Londoner
Posts: 1783
Joined: March 8th, 2013, 12:46 pm

Re: Human Rights- A Challenge for the Forum

Post by Londoner » May 10th, 2018, 8:26 am

Here is a helpful article about subjects and citizens:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4191613.stm

Dachshund
Posts: 512
Joined: October 11th, 2017, 5:30 pm

Re: Human Rights- A Challenge for the Forum

Post by Dachshund » May 10th, 2018, 9:43 am

Londoner wrote:
May 10th, 2018, 8:26 am
Here is a helpful article about subjects and citizens:
Are you familiar with Burke's aesthetic theory ? In particular, do you understand his conception of the sublime ?

Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 2159
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Human Rights- A Challenge for the Forum

Post by Belindi » May 10th, 2018, 9:46 am

I feel happy to be subject to the UK state and to the monarch as head of state but I wish we had a labour government.

Dachshund
Posts: 512
Joined: October 11th, 2017, 5:30 pm

Re: Human Rights- A Challenge for the Forum

Post by Dachshund » May 10th, 2018, 10:56 am

Dear Belinda,

I do not think that Jeremy Corbyn has very much respect at all for Her Majesty the Queen, nor, more generally speaking, for the traditional institution of an hereditary Crown in Britain. I do not think he finds his status as a subject of the monarch very congenial; and the fact that "John Bull" and the rest of "oi polloi" in your "green and pleasant land" are fully aware of this is one of the main reasons -(IMO) - that "Citizen Corbyn" will never step foot in Number 10 Downing Street as a Prime Minister of Britain.

Regards

Dachshund

User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1122
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Human Rights- A Challenge for the Forum

Post by ThomasHobbes » May 10th, 2018, 4:44 pm

Belindi wrote:
May 10th, 2018, 9:46 am
I feel happy to be subject to the UK state and to the monarch as head of state but I wish we had a labour government.
I also wish for a Labour government, and have felt that way for the last two and a half years.
But i've never understood why anyone would want to support a monarchy.
The existence of the monarch supports an ideology which demands that it's okay for people to receive advantages regardless of their merit. This poisons society from top to bottom, keeping the population as slaves. And sadly they seem to love it.
Monarchy is a denial of human dignity, and stands as a continuing threat to legal equality. Members of the Royal family and the panoply of titled aristocrats enjoy effective legal immunity from many offences, and tend to avoid police investigation.

User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1122
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Human Rights- A Challenge for the Forum

Post by ThomasHobbes » May 10th, 2018, 4:48 pm

Dachshund wrote:
May 10th, 2018, 10:56 am
Dear Belinda,

I do not think that Jeremy Corbyn has very much respect at all for Her Majesty the Queen, nor, more generally speaking, for the traditional institution of an hereditary Crown in Britain. I do not think he finds his status as a subject of the monarch very congenial; and the fact that "John Bull" and the rest of "oi polloi" in your "green and pleasant land" are fully aware of this is one of the main reasons -(IMO) - that "Citizen Corbyn" will never step foot in Number 10 Downing Street as a Prime Minister of Britain.

Regards

Dachshund
Sadly this may well be correct.
No politician has attracted as much fake news, vilification and open attacks from the media and ever from within his own party, despite having widespread popular support, and the backing of 100s of thousands of grass roots party members.

Eduk
Posts: 2466
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: Human Rights- A Challenge for the Forum

Post by Eduk » May 10th, 2018, 4:58 pm

Bit of a shame about all that anti-Semitism stuff though.
Unknown means unknown.

User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1122
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Human Rights- A Challenge for the Forum

Post by ThomasHobbes » May 10th, 2018, 5:13 pm

Eduk wrote:
May 10th, 2018, 4:58 pm
Bit of a shame about all that anti-Semitism stuff though.
LOL.
In an organisation with 500,000 there have been 75 complaints. Two have been upheld by the party HQ. TWO.
That is not an "antisemitism problem", it is a media frenzy to denigrate Jeremy Corbyn.

Jacob Rees Mogg has called Vanessa Felz a "fat Jewish slag", and called Baroness Lawrence a N**G*R, but has received no sanction from is party, the Conservatives.

Our own foreign secretary, the RT Hon Boris Johnson has used racist language on numerous occasions.
e.g
"What a relief it must be for Blair to get out of England. It is said that the Queen has come to love the Commonwealth, partly because it supplies her with regular cheering crowds of flag-waving piccaninnies," he wrote. It also mentioned "watermelon smiles".

Currently the Tories are reeling from the racist immigration policy concerning the "Windrush generation' scandal. This has involved people who having lived here all their lives being "repatriated' to places like Jamaica, and having their driving licence being seized, jobs lost, and families broken up.

Eduk
Posts: 2466
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: Human Rights- A Challenge for the Forum

Post by Eduk » May 10th, 2018, 5:53 pm

So just to be clear. All criticism of any Labour party member is laughable and massively exaggerated, for presumably nefarious means. But all criticism of the conservative party is 100% accurate and buried, also presumably for nefarious reasons.
Do you have any idea how your points make you sound?
Personally I think strong support of any party can be explained by personal gain or some kind of bias, be that unconscious or otherwise.
It reminds me of a podcast I was listening to the other day. An audio engineer was explaining some of the cons in his field of expertise (like expensive speaker cables). Good consumer advice was raised as an issue and he was asked to recommend a magazine which was reputable. He said none of them were. Even the ones for professionals.
Good advice exists in the world regarding audio equipment but for a consumer it is nigh on impossible to find.
Regarding politics you may as well say the situation is even worse. I for one know of no reputable source for political information. Again I'm sure it exists somewhere, but darned if I can find it and it certainly doesn't exist in any popular source.
Unknown means unknown.

Londoner
Posts: 1783
Joined: March 8th, 2013, 12:46 pm

Re: Human Rights- A Challenge for the Forum

Post by Londoner » May 11th, 2018, 4:40 am

Eduk wrote:
May 10th, 2018, 5:53 pm
So just to be clear. All criticism of any Labour party member is laughable and massively exaggerated, for presumably nefarious means. But all criticism of the conservative party is 100% accurate and buried, also presumably for nefarious reasons.
Yes.

Newspapers and other media who have a political agenda will give distorted accounts so as to support that agenda.

This cannot be news to anybody, surely?

Post Reply