Rights

[Stevil]

Rights are legal, social, or ethical principles of freedom or entitlement; that is, rights are the fundamental normative rules about what is allowed of people or owed to people, according to some legal system, social convention, or ethical theory. as wiki states

I disagree with this.
Especially "rights are the fundamental normative rules"
Rights are not rules. Rules are constraints that are used to frame "rights".

Ethical principles of freedom are worthless. There is no objective ethical standard.

[pytheas]

Rights are legal, social, or ethical principles of freedom or entitlement; that is, rights are the fundamental normative rules about what is allowed of people or owed to people, according to some legal system, social convention, or ethical theory. as wiki states

I disagree with this.
Especially "rights are the fundamental normative rules"
Rights are not rules. Rules are constraints that are used to frame "rights".

Ethical principles of freedom are worthless. There is no objective ethical standard.

the freedom of choice is worthless? the principle of consciousness is "voting" in a neuronal coordinated firing level
Who cares about universal because that is what you mean. objective? you breath air of specific composition and require specific amounts of oxygen water food (company, sex, cigarretes)
the frame,  the field of operation, the perspective is part of our function. Within each instant there can be objectivity.
Within particular frames thereupon, specific situations a consensus good or bad is reached with astonishing uniformity.
As you change the rules , theframe so does the voting adapt. Differences in shifting perspectives can be attributed to poor uniform recognition of the new set of parameters. as always clarity of information is part of the solution

everything flows and everchanges in the cosmic backdrop

---------------------------------------------------------------------
i can not press the argument with the vague notion of "rights"
I fold to your indication  and retreat in the frame I am familiar and interested in, Human Rights

[Stevil]

I fold to your indication  and retreat in the frame I am familiar and interested in, Human Rights

Human rights would be great for discussion.
It seems this would be a difficult set of rights to frame. Rights in general is difficult enough.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights seems to be a pretty good attempt.
But some of these seem quite vague, for example in the quote below what is meant by dignity, rights, or spirit of brotherhood?

Article 1

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

It is interesting to me that these are a list of perceived rights, rather than a rule to frame them.

[pytheas]

I fold to your indication  and retreat in the frame I am familiar and interested in, Human Rights

Human rights would be great for discussion.
It seems this would be a difficult set of rights to frame. Rights in general is difficult enough.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights seems to be a pretty good attempt.
But some of these seem quite vague, for example in the quote below what is meant by dignity, rights, or spirit of brotherhood?

Article 1

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

It is interesting to me that these are a list of perceived rights, rather than a rule to frame them.

dignity as an answer  to human need of self-respect, self-determination, self-confidence
likewise a need for the social animal, to belong and identify to a group is represented in spirits of brotherhood( with a lots of sisters in as well, preferably)

i wrote an eloquent agreed furthemore, but my 1 year old crawled onto and pressed Esc on the keyboard so it was lost

not only interesting but we actively participate in defining the width of moral good and bad in a uniform way, if one normalises for the specific inputs and cultural peculiarities. that is the slippery "normative" range of what we refer back to as healthy

kids acquire this sense of good and bad before they can be taught to remember formal rules and before they have a discipline according to reason to disagree with their emotion and grudgingly do the "right" thing

life gives ample evidence of what bullshit religion is if used for living, persiring, paining morals

1) (dont)do to others what you (dont) want done to yourself, which is base mirror neurons and oxytocin bonds


2) Live and let live, which is transcedental intelligence

3) while everything is allowed, certain things are not accepted, which is Albert Camus in Sisiphus and an outcome of knowthyself and social wisdom progression