Except that when it comes to the crunch we so often seem to act as if we have no choice. People dive into freezing water to rescue swimmers in danger, people in Syria run into the path of bullets to drag the wounded to safety. Surely the point is that there is some deep unconscious instinct working inside each of us that drives us to act even when reason tells us that to do so would be to risk our own lives. In moments of extreme crisis we seem to treat complete strangers as brothers or sisters.
Democracy: Some walk between the raindrops, some are sought for spoil and prey. Some gather to gawk, some circle like sharks in chummed waters, some walk on by. This is the law and the order. This is just-us. This is the human condition.
This lecture is missing the fundamental foundation to rights. See the newly released book titled: “Scientific Proof of Our Unalienable Rights.” This book covers the first known scientific proof to these Rights, taking the discourse out of the ivory tower for all to understand.
Individual rights both sides of the argument were well articulated, both The dark side(necessary evil) and light side of self autonomy and even the calling that many get to go above and beyond for their fellow human beings; not necessarily a right, but an adaptation to hard challenges. To take this to a deeper level: Is shared human destiny an unalienable right? Is mutually assured destruction an unalienable right? To go a slight step further; does this planet we all depend on, that arguably without this planet (life wouldn't even ask these questions) & all other rights therefor wouldn't mean a thing, have a right also?
This will sound like a naive question. Are human rights inherent to all human beings? Whether someone exercises the notion of reaching out for their own cause and others or whether they offer it to another can human beings ever fall outside of these two notions? Human rights on this premise seems tied into choice. Choice in opposition of thoughts/feelings and then action based on choice rather than thought/feeling. So the idea of conviction isn't inherent, it's designed as a product of choice.
@SEThatered Would you say that private property is a right? And so, how would you explain the Bolshevik revolution? The idea of ‘‘rights’’ comes from the people but the state is the one who makes them available for the population.
The rich rule the poor. One's "rights" are determined by one's place on the plantation. We are tools in a bag. Some understand the significance and explication thereof and, consequently, do well. The clueless are consumed in use, die deaths of dispair, and tossed on the trash heap. Have a nice day.
@Scientisticsoviet Rights can be tolerated and exercised on mutual agreements. Rights that come from cultural background are not enforced by anyone or even written anywhere, they are followed out of mutual respect. It would be much more simple if one structure could enforce rights, but it isn't. Rights and power are two terms not necessary related to each other. Rights exist even between chimps and bonobos. Do they have governments?
@Scientisticsoviet So an "enforcing power structure (like the state)" should dictate you how you interct with your kids? And what if that "enforcing power structure (like the state)" will enforce you to kill your children? Rights come from our interactions, instincts, ethics and social standards.
Damn this long as hell can anybody give me a list of the most important ideas from it?
same anyone feel like sharing?
lol I have that same worksheet to fill in today for online class
half my class reading this waiting for someone to answer
@@owenmcanulty889 any of you do it lmao just got assigned for my class
@BK - 12ZZ 743965 David Suzuki SS Im no longer in school lol
Except that when it comes to the crunch we so often seem to act as if we have no choice. People dive into freezing water to rescue swimmers in danger, people in Syria run into the path of bullets to drag the wounded to safety. Surely the point is that there is some deep unconscious instinct working inside each of us that drives us to act even when reason tells us that to do so would be to risk our own lives. In moments of extreme crisis we seem to treat complete strangers as brothers or sisters.
thought provoking........some very pertinent questions and statements relating to the most apparent, yet often ignored, facts of life......
Democracy: Some walk between the raindrops, some are sought for spoil and prey. Some gather to gawk, some circle like sharks in chummed waters, some walk on by. This is the law and the order. This is just-us. This is the human condition.
The right of education, treaty and speech
What question does morality ask? How is it with me? Or, does morality ask, How is it with the other?
Cheney made it official. We never left the dark ages.
This lecture is missing the fundamental foundation to rights. See the newly released book titled: “Scientific Proof of Our Unalienable Rights.” This book covers the first known scientific proof to these Rights, taking the discourse out of the ivory tower for all to understand.
Individual rights both sides of the argument were well articulated, both The dark side(necessary evil) and light side of self autonomy and even the calling that many get to go above and beyond for their fellow human beings; not necessarily a right, but an adaptation to hard challenges.
To take this to a deeper level:
Is shared human destiny an unalienable right? Is mutually assured destruction an unalienable right?
To go a slight step further; does this planet we all depend on, that arguably without this planet (life wouldn't even ask these questions) & all other rights therefor wouldn't mean a thing, have a right also?
Great idea!
This will sound like a naive question. Are human rights inherent to all human beings? Whether someone exercises the notion of reaching out for their own cause and others or whether they offer it to another can human beings ever fall outside of these two notions? Human rights on this premise seems tied into choice. Choice in opposition of thoughts/feelings and then action based on choice rather than thought/feeling. So the idea of conviction isn't inherent, it's designed as a product of choice.
@SEThatered Would you say that private property is a right? And so, how would you explain the Bolshevik revolution? The idea of ‘‘rights’’ comes from the people but the state is the one who makes them available for the population.
The rich rule the poor. One's "rights" are determined by one's place on the plantation. We are tools in a bag. Some understand the significance and explication thereof and, consequently, do well. The clueless are consumed in use, die deaths of dispair, and tossed on the trash heap. Have a nice day.
you are right except if you think this will end up well for anyone you are sorely mistaken
@Scientisticsoviet
Rights can be tolerated and exercised on mutual agreements.
Rights that come from cultural background are not enforced by anyone or even written anywhere, they are followed out of mutual respect.
It would be much more simple if one structure could enforce rights, but it isn't.
Rights and power are two terms not necessary related to each other.
Rights exist even between chimps and bonobos. Do they have governments?
@Scientisticsoviet
So an "enforcing power structure (like the state)" should dictate you how you interct with your kids? And what if that "enforcing power structure (like the state)" will enforce you to kill your children?
Rights come from our interactions, instincts, ethics and social standards.
National security- Corporate interest.
20:20 There is something on his head O.o
if youve all got so many words you should write a flippin' bwook.