A "right" doesn't exist in nature. It's not a physical thing or object. Therefore a "right" is a concept or an idea. A right is a claim that a human makes to an action or set of actions. When a human makes a claim about a "right" he/she is/are stating that they are able to engage in that particular action or set of actions and no other human will be justified in stopping them from engaging in that that action or set of actions.
Since the concept of a "right" is not something that exists in nature (like a tree, or a river, or a rock) a right could be considered as a type of fiction.
When rights are "granted" or "acknowledged" via government documents that would be an example of a fictional organization recognizing a fictional "right".
But one could also make the argument that rights are naturally vested within humans. I personally believe this. But I think it would be a difficult claim to make in a world focused on empiricism.
How can we have a "right" when other humans are still capable of acting in opposition to it?
If rights naturally exist they would have to exist OUTSIDE mankind's agreement. In other words, they would have to exist in a way as if they had been programmed or built right INTO the fabric of nature itself. But they would not be written or recorded by nature using words or an alphabet. It would be the duty and responsibility of each man and woman to discover these "rights" for themselves through observation and personal experience.
It's an interesting concept.
I believe we do have rights, and I believe they are built right into the fabric of nature. But I don't think this is something I would be able to "prove" to anyone.
If I stick my hand in a squirrel nest, and invade it's home. Does it not have the right to bite me for my own aggression or stupidity?
I don't think it cares at all whether you think it has a right to bite you, it either will or it won't.
Truth is subjective. It either is or it isn't. Doesnt matter what anyone, you I or the squirrel thinks. It either has he right to defend it's home or it doesn't
I feel like I understand what you are saying. But I don't see it as a "right". It's just a naturally expected reaction that we would be wise to forsee and therefore avoid.
(post is archived)