Hi Steve, > Can you give me a definition of "rights"? If so I might be able to > better understand why you think they come from God.
Rights that belong to the essential nature of man to which every individual is entitled, including the rights to life, liberty and property. > > Steve: > >> As for my answer, I agree with Pirsig who argues that rights are > >> part of a > >> social-intellectual moral code which describes how societies have > >> come to > >> agree that the intellectual level should be free from social > >> control. These > >> "rights" have evolved and continue to evolve as societies come to > >> better > >> understand how they can facilitate evolution towards DQ. > > > > Platt: > > What evidence do you have to support Pirsig's theory? If "societies > > agree" and "come to agree" about what rights need to "evolve," then rights > > emerge from the whim of masses, like a "right to health care." The > > Founding Fathers anticipated such infections, establishing a firewall > > whereby certain rights are inalienable being "endowed by the Creator." and > > thus immune from manipulation by approval-seeking politicians. > Steve: > The above suggests that rights come from the Founding Fathers and in > how they defined rights of citizens. I think rights of citizens may > be equivalent to responsibilities of government. If you know what the > purpose of government is then you can say what the rights of citizens are. > > According to Northrop's book, the founding father's were influenced > by Locke who argued that the only reason for people to give up some > of their liberty and subject themselves to government is that they > can't protect their private property (pursuit of happiness) for > themselves. No doubt the Founding Father's were influenced by Locke who was a Deist. So were many of the Founding Fathers. > >> Platt: > >>> .Religiously active people report greater happiness. A 16 nation > >>> collaberative study of 166,000 people in 14 nations found > >>> happiness and > >>> life satisfaction rise with the strength of religious affiliation and > >>> frequency of attendance at worship services. > >>> > >>> This last finding should be of particular interest to those who find > >>> happiness a measure of morality. > > > >> Steve: > >> It is interesting. (Of course it doesn't constitute any evidence > >> that there > >> is a God. DMBs quote about the diamond buried in the backyard > >> applies.) > >> There are definitely some really good things about religion, but > >> there are > >> undoubtedly some really bad things about religion too. The issue > >> that we > >> will have to deal with as we turn away from superstition is how > >> can we keep > >> the good things about religion as we discard religious dogma. > > > > Platt: > > About good and the bad, the same can be said of rationalism, the very > > rational Communist Manifesto being a case in point. > > Steve: > Would you actually argue that the problem with Stalin is that he was > trying to be too reasonable? Is it not reasonable for a dictator to eliminate those who oppose him? From the rational Communist Manifesto: "The first step on the path to the workers' revolution is the elevation of the proletariat to the position of ruling class. The proletariat will gain from its political domination by gradually tearing away from the bourgeoisie all capital, by centralizing all means of production in the hands of the State, that is to say in the hands of the proletariat itself organized as the ruling class." Does "dictatorship of the proletariat" ring a bell? > Sam Harris: > "The problem with fascism and communism, however, is not that they > are too critical of religion; the problem is that they are too much > like religions. Such regimes are dogmatic to the core and generally > give rise to personality cults that are indistinguishable from cults > of religious hero worship. Auschwitz, the gulag and the killing > fields were not examples of what happens when human beings reject > religious dogma; they are examples of political, racial and > nationalistic dogma run amok." Supported by a rationale as being "for the public good." Incidentally, does the current adoration of the Obama remind you of religious hero worship? It does me. > Platt: > > The evidence seems to > > show, however, that superstition and religious dogma can lead to > > happiness > > which, by Harris' criteria, is moral. Or did I miss something? > > Steve: > One issue is that we are considering a correlation between happiness > and religion which doesn't necessarily imply cause and effect. Not necessarily, but reasonably. > The other point is that it is not only happiness but suffering that > Harris says we need to consider in judging morality. Certainly > religion continues to be a great source of suffering. Compared to the state as a source of suffering, religion is heaven. Statists tend to forget that Communism and National Socialism were responsible for over 125 million deaths in the last century. > But I think there is something missing in Harris' analysis of > morality in that unlike Pirsig, he did not articulate a morality that puts > intellectual quality above social quality which makes him vulnerable to the > argument you make about religion making people happy. Not my argument. A fact shown by scientific studies, as reported in Scientific American. Harris should be sent a copy of the report. > In the MOQ the truth > about whether or not their are gods is more morally important than how we > feel about the answers. Truths in the MOQ are like paintings in a gallery whereby you choose which truths have more quality than others. Given the quality of the political philosophy of Locke and the Founding Fathers, I am not about to knock religious belief as something we must dispense with outright. Like all beliefs we should judge them according to how well they promote individual freedom. In the case of Locke and the Founding Fathers, quite a bit I should think. Regards, Platt Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
