Thanks! But how do we know he is "right"? :-) I think he has left out some monumental variables but I need to read it again. On the other hand, I think he is opening the discussion far beyond what we accumulate from the news, commentators, politicians or our own bias.
Another thought I had was that Luck and Fortune still are heavyweights- it does no good to preach rights in a tyranny or if the entire population is corrupt- hungry or not. And what about the self- interest of those who establish universal rights? However, I will continue to think about this- perhaps our global society and inter- dependence will force universal standards. Also, I can't help but think this is related to a smaller stage- of family, "tribe", religion, form of government, type of education and so on- which are major influences and he seems to skip over/leave out. On Jun 1, 1:19 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks rigsy! This is one of the best (read: accurate) articles on the > subject I've read in a long time. I feel this philosopher has it > 'right' as far as I can tell. > > On Jun 1, 6:37 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/29/are-there-natural-hum... > > > I started to read the comments which are lively but I need breakfast...- > > Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
