Natural rights: Do they exist? Where do they come from? Are they relevant today?

And that's why the answer to whether natural rights exist is - no.

 

'Might makes right' is the law of the jungle, while 'right makes might' is the law of the civilized world.

So I would say the degree of natural rights for a human or sentient being would be proportional to the degree of civilization and culture that the sentient being finds around him or her.

 

And when civilization changes or stops entirely - what "rights" exist then?

 

Probably those that develop through custom. Back to the future!

 

Or, to put it realistically, none.

 

Oh, I agree with Hobbes. Humans will get tired of the "war of all against all" and opt for a government, possibly a totalitarian one, who will protect their bodily security. Eventually, they may secure some rights, although lots of despotisms have and do exist without them. They don't come naturally

 

As said - there are NO natural rights. None.

 

You see the way consensus works if you only have one source and I have 4 sources then consensus demands we rely on the 4 sources. Your posts always claim consensus, Im surprised you dont follow your own methodology.

 

Is it natural for a person to eat?

 

Very confusing.
What do you think a natural right is, do you have to be born with an impenetrable force field around you before you consider a right to be a 'natural' right?

Tell us how you would know if a right is natural or not. My bet is you cant!

 

Thats very well said and in practice very true.

However when we talk about natural rights we are talking about that which is inherent by design, most living creatures have some level or degree of natural rights, at least amongst themselves, rights by design.

This wont stop them from being eaten any more than someone dropping a nuke on your head or going postal.

That is not the meaning of a 'right'.

I agree that when natural rights fail to be observed, or governments become despotic and tyrranical, then "might rules, either for right or for wrong", typically for wrong, unless greed, money, and power are 'right'.

that shifts the discussion from 'natural' rights to political rights however.

Might is always political except in one on one situations.

 

I thought the question was about "natural rights".

 

Im trying to get a feeling for what is natural and what is not?
How can we know what is natural and what is not if we dont first identify have a clear distinction between the two? I dont think rights are in question, I think if they are 'natural' is in question.
This is why I asked if it is natural to eat? Maybe there is a better approach?

 

Everything we do is natural.

But not anything we do is a "right".

 

It seems that if everything we do is natural and somewhere in there we find that we have a right then wouldnt that mean we have the existence of natural rights?

 

No.

We can only do what we do until someone or something stops us.

That's why there's no such thing as a "right".

 

I don't think there is such a thing. The closest we come is the right to equal respect and concern. But even that is probably a moral construct--or possibly a late discovery.

 

That would mean there is really no distinction between "natural" and artificial. There are, unfortunately, societies past and present which never seem to have developed the concept of individual rights. China, North Korea, and Putin's Russia come to mind.

 

Thats not an answer to the question however.

What I want from you is an explanation what a right that you would consider 'natural' would have to look like IF a natural right DOES exist, what would be the necessary attributes of a "natural right" according to you.

Describe it.

We all know how to describe and distinguish the difference between a pink elephant in my coffee cup and no pink elephant in my coffee cup, same goes for a description of natural right.

All I see so far is floundering around without definition.

I want the distinction between what you would consider a natural right versus an unnatural right?

You have never clarified a distinction,

 

What were "rights " 10 million years ago and who or what had them?