Australian Politics Forum - What is a 'right'?

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48814
At my desk.

Re: What is a 'right'?
Reply #210 - Oct 4^th, 2023 at 1:36pm

Quote:

The issue is the meaning of the phrase "inter-subjective-reality", not (or as well as) the meaning of the individual words in the phrase.

Ah.

Have you tried googling the phrase instead of the individual words?

Or in the case of your most recent attempt, the word components?

I could copy and paste it for you, but I think you will learn more if you figure out how to google whole phrases for yourself.

Does your owner not allow you to use google?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12184
Gender: male

Re: What is a 'right'?
Reply #211 - Oct 5^th, 2023 at 9:41am

freediver wrote on Oct 4^th, 2023 at 1:36pm:

Quote:

The issue is the meaning of the phrase "inter-subjective-reality", not (or as well as) the meaning of the individual words in the phrase.

Ah.

Have you tried googling the phrase instead of the individual words?

Or in the case of your most recent attempt, the word components?

I could copy and paste it for you, but I think you will learn more if you figure out how to google whole phrases for yourself.

Does your owner not allow you to use google?

First answer from google (among 680K, a large number as usual):

"This is what Harari calls “intersubjective reality”. It consists of imaginary entities that exist only within the communication network linking the subjective consciousness of many individuals. Money, gods, laws, nations and corporations are some examples of intersubjective reality."12 Dec 2019

Now, fraudiver: what do YOU call "inter-subjective reality".

We have Harari's description, above, which aligns with the contention that rights are subjective, not inherent and inalienable universals, eg, of the sort the UN is seeking, in the UNUniversalDHR.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48814
At my desk.

Re: What is a 'right'?
Reply #212 - Oct 5^th, 2023 at 10:50am

thegreatdivide wrote on Oct 5^th, 2023 at 9:41am:

freediver wrote on Oct 4^th, 2023 at 1:36pm:

Quote:

The issue is the meaning of the phrase "inter-subjective-reality", not (or as well as) the meaning of the individual words in the phrase.

Ah.

Have you tried googling the phrase instead of the individual words?

Or in the case of your most recent attempt, the word components?

I could copy and paste it for you, but I think you will learn more if you figure out how to google whole phrases for yourself.

Does your owner not allow you to use google?

First answer from google (among 680K, a large number as usual):

"This is what Harari calls “intersubjective reality”. It consists of imaginary entities that exist only within the communication network linking the subjective consciousness of many individuals. Money, gods, laws, nations and corporations are some examples of intersubjective reality."12 Dec 2019

Now, fraudiver: what do YOU call "inter-subjective reality".

We have Harari's description, above, which aligns with the contention that rights are subjective, not inherent and inalienable universals, eg, of the sort the UN is seeking, in the UNUniversalDHR.

That sounds like a reasonable description to me. And there is nothing in it that contradicts rights being inalienable.

Are you still trying to convince everyone that human rights are not a part of our anatomy?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12184
Gender: male

Re: What is a 'right'?
Reply #213 - Oct 5^th, 2023 at 11:21am

freediver wrote on Oct 5^th, 2023 at 10:50am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Oct 5^th, 2023 at 9:41am:

freediver wrote on Oct 4^th, 2023 at 1:36pm:

Quote:

The issue is the meaning of the phrase "inter-subjective-reality", not (or as well as) the meaning of the individual words in the phrase.

Ah.

Have you tried googling the phrase instead of the individual words?

Or in the case of your most recent attempt, the word components?

I could copy and paste it for you, but I think you will learn more if you figure out how to google whole phrases for yourself.

Does your owner not allow you to use google?

First answer from google (among 680K, a large number as usual):

"This is what Harari calls “intersubjective reality”. It consists of imaginary entities that exist only within the communication network linking the subjective consciousness of many individuals. Money, gods, laws, nations and corporations are some examples of intersubjective reality."12 Dec 2019

Now, fraudiver: what do YOU call "inter-subjective reality".

We have Harari's description, above, which aligns with the contention that rights are subjective, not inherent and inalienable universals, eg, of the sort the UN is seeking, in the UNUniversalDHR.

That sounds like a reasonable description to me.

Good...so let's see it help us to determine/clarify "what is a right"?

Quote:

And there is nothing in it that contradicts rights being inalienable.

"... imaginary entities that exist only within the communication network linking the subjective consciousness of many individuals

So the "subjective consciousness of many individuals" is an inalienable right, according to you.

Which explains why endless wars and entrenched poverty rule the world, the very condition the UN was trying to change, in order to "save mankind from the scourge of war"

Quote:

Are you still trying to convince everyone that human rights are not a part of our anatomy?

Indeed the conscious desire for 'fairness' (often conflated with "rights") arises in the human cortex brain which IS part of our anatomy.

But it seems you think our kidneys, for example, are the seat of "rights"....oops....

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 48814 At my desk.	Re: What is a 'right'? Reply #214 - Oct 5^th, 2023 at 11:23am Quote: So the "subjective consciousness of many individuals" is an inalienable right, according to you. No, that is not what I said.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12184
Gender: male

Re: What is a 'right'?
Reply #215 - Oct 5^th, 2023 at 11:39am

freediver wrote on Oct 5^th, 2023 at 11:23am:

Quote:

So the "subjective consciousness of many individuals" is an inalienable right, according to you.

No, that is not what I said.

Yet you - being fraudiver - don't have the nous or integrity to explain what you think the passage means, hence being a prize fraud, you are satisfied to rely on what you didn't/won't say.

Let's have another try - and see where the fraud takes us this time...:

(Rights are) "... imaginary entities that exist only within the communication network linking the subjective consciousness of many individuals"

What does that say, for YOU, re 'inalienable rights'?

And can you give an example of said "rights".

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 48814 At my desk.	Re: What is a 'right'? Reply #216 - Oct 5^th, 2023 at 1:33pm Can you tell the difference between these two statements? Apples are a type of fruit. Fruit are a type of apple.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 43832
Gender: male

Re: What is a 'right'?
Reply #217 - Oct 5^th, 2023 at 7:28pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Oct 5^th, 2023 at 11:39am:

freediver wrote on Oct 5^th, 2023 at 11:23am:

Quote:

So the "subjective consciousness of many individuals" is an inalienable right, according to you.

No, that is not what I said.

Yet you - being fraudiver - don't have the nous or integrity to explain what you think the passage means, hence being a prize fraud, you are satisfied to rely on what you didn't/won't say.

Let's have another try - and see where the fraud takes us this time...:

(Rights are) "... imaginary entities that exist only within the communication network linking the subjective consciousness of many individuals"

What does that say, for YOU, re 'inalienable rights'?

And can you give an example of said "rights".

Think - if that is not too much to ask of you (It is, ed.) - of how rights can be violated and by whom and on what ground?

On what grounds can anyone deny or violate the freedom of thought and conscience?

Where does the right to violate them can come from?

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 43832
Gender: male

Re: What is a 'right'?
Reply #218 - Oct 5^th, 2023 at 7:31pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Oct 5^th, 2023 at 11:39am:

freediver wrote on Oct 5^th, 2023 at 11:23am:

Quote:

So the "subjective consciousness of many individuals" is an inalienable right, according to you.

No, that is not what I said.

Yet you - being fraudiver - don't have the nous or integrity to explain what you think the passage means, hence being a prize fraud, you are satisfied to rely on what you didn't/won't say.

Let's have another try - and see where the fraud takes us this time...:

(Rights are) "... imaginary entities that exist only within the communication network linking the subjective consciousness of many individuals"

What does that say, for YOU, re 'inalienable rights'?

And can you give an example of said "rights".

Think - if that is not too much to ask of you (It is, ed.) - of how rights can be violated and by whom and on what ground?

On what grounds can anyone deny or violate the freedom of thought and conscience?

Where does the right to violate them can come from?

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

chimera

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 10507
armidale
Gender: male

Re: What is a 'right'?
Reply #219 - Oct 6^th, 2023 at 6:50am

freediver wrote on Oct 5^th, 2023 at 10:50am:

rights being inalienable.

'Rights are legal, social, or ethical principles of freedom or entitlement according to some legal system'.

That is so in signed constitutions or the signed UN charter which become law, or judge's laws. Until then, the subjective ideas have no power of entitlement and are not owed by a legal system. Freediver has no inherent rights to be right. Being wrong is an inherent mistake and is not illegal and he has rights to do it only after it's written into law (sometimes).

Back to top

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12184
Gender: male

Re: What is a 'right'?
Reply #220 - Oct 6^th, 2023 at 9:00am

Frank wrote on Oct 5^th, 2023 at 7:28pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Oct 5^th, 2023 at 11:39am:

freediver wrote on Oct 5^th, 2023 at 11:23am:

Quote:

So the "subjective consciousness of many individuals" is an inalienable right, according to you.

No, that is not what I said.

Yet you - being fraudiver - don't have the nous or integrity to explain what you think the passage means, hence being a prize fraud, you are satisfied to rely on what you didn't/won't say.

Let's have another try - and see where the fraud takes us this time...:

(Rights are) "... imaginary entities that exist only within the communication network linking the subjective consciousness of many individuals"

What does that say, for YOU, re 'inalienable rights'?

And can you give an example of said "rights".

Think - if that is not too much to ask of you (It is, ed.) - of how rights can be violated and by whom and on what ground?

Are we talking about individuals' differing opinions, and/or desires?

chimera has noted: 'Rights are legal, social, or ethical principles of freedom or entitlement according to some legal system'.

The underlined is key - rights are not inherent/inalienable, but exist by virtue of being established within a system of law.

Quote:

On what grounds can anyone deny or violate the freedom of thought and conscience?

At least you are an honest debater, unlike our prize fraud, fraudiver.

In my opinion, on the grounds of collective security and wellbeing; "freedom values" ideology worshipped by naturally self-interested individuals results in the richest country in the world tolerating half its population living paycheck to paycheck, the very definition of chronic financial stress. Crippling political hyperpartisanship follows as sure as night follows day.

Quote:

Where does the right to violate them can come from?

The desire for 'fairness', in human affairs.

Back to top

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12184
Gender: male

Re: What is a 'right'?
Reply #221 - Oct 6^th, 2023 at 9:20am

freediver wrote on Oct 5^th, 2023 at 1:33pm:

Can you tell the difference between these two statements?

Apples are a type of fruit.

Fruit are a type of apple.

The first statement is correct, the 2nd gramatically incorrect.

Fruit is an entire species, not a sub-category of that species (eg Granny Smith).

"Fruit are a type of Granny Smith".....an example of the well-known "fallacy of composition" which conservatives repeatedly fall for, because of their delusional "freedom of the individual" ideology.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 48814 At my desk.	Re: What is a 'right'? Reply #222 - Oct 6^th, 2023 at 9:27am What is the grammatical error?
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

chimera

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 10507
armidale
Gender: male

Re: What is a 'right'?
Reply #223 - Oct 6^th, 2023 at 9:33am

thegreatdivide wrote on Oct 6^th, 2023 at 9:00am:

Are we talking about individuals' differing opinions, and/or desires?

The term 'rights' has many levels from subjective good manners to Trump getting 641 years behind bars. My query is to push into the US language in its major self-defining documents. The fluid concept of the word 'rights' makes for confusion in debate here and also sloppy thinking and self-serving error in US texts.

Back to top

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 43832
Gender: male

Re: What is a 'right'?
Reply #224 - Oct 6^th, 2023 at 9:36am

thegreatdivide wrote on Oct 6^th, 2023 at 9:00am:

Frank wrote on Oct 5^th, 2023 at 7:28pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Oct 5^th, 2023 at 11:39am:

freediver wrote on Oct 5^th, 2023 at 11:23am:

Quote:

So the "subjective consciousness of many individuals" is an inalienable right, according to you.

No, that is not what I said.

Yet you - being fraudiver - don't have the nous or integrity to explain what you think the passage means, hence being a prize fraud, you are satisfied to rely on what you didn't/won't say.

Let's have another try - and see where the fraud takes us this time...:

(Rights are) "... imaginary entities that exist only within the communication network linking the subjective consciousness of many individuals"

What does that say, for YOU, re 'inalienable rights'?

And can you give an example of said "rights".

Think - if that is not too much to ask of you (It is, ed.) - of how rights can be violated and by whom and on what ground?

Are we talking about individuals' differing opinions, and/or desires?

chimera has noted: 'Rights are legal, social, or ethical principles of freedom or entitlement according to some legal system'.

The underlined is key - rights are not inherent/inalienable, but exist by virtue of being established within a system of law.

Quote:

On what grounds can anyone deny or violate the freedom of thought and conscience?

At least you are an honest debater, unlike our prize fraud, fraudiver.

In my opinion, on the grounds of collective security and wellbeing; "freedom values" ideology worshipped by naturally self-interested individuals results in the richest country in the world tolerating half its population living paycheck to paycheck, the very definition of chronic financial stress. Crippling political hyperpartisanship follows as sure as night follows day.

Quote:

Where does the right to violate them can come from?

The desire for 'fairness', in human affairs.

How does freedom of thought and conscience interfere with or hinder collective security and wellbeing?

Your opposing the two, as being antagonistic to each other shows the devil's hoof of your Marxist ideology.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged