Sorry to start so late tonight, was playing with my kids. :-)
Friday night open thread–9:24pm Eastern!
Defending the liberal tradition in history, science, and philosophy.
Support Dean’s World
Defending the liberal tradition in history, science, and philosophy.
Sorry to start so late tonight, was playing with my kids. :-)
Friday night open thread–9:24pm Eastern!
{ 22 comments }
A Poll:
Who here believes that by the act of being born, one becomes morally obligated to provide food, shelter, health-care, etc to their fellow human beings?
By “morally obligated”, I mean “an absolute obligation that may be morally enforced at the point of a gun if neccesary”. (For instance, I believe that if you are morally obligated to not force yourself sexually on an unwilling woman, and that she has every right to enforce that at the point of a gun.)
This isn’t a poll to determine what kind of food, shelter, healthcare, etc should be provided… but just to determine whether each of you feels that such an obligation exists.
For those of you who feel it exists… who does it exist to? Your family? People who live in your state? People who live in your nation? Everyone who is alive?
– DW
If I were to really dig into this question, I’d have to ask where anyone gets any “right” to anything if the rest of us by and large–mostly by consensus–do not gree.
But to just take it at face value: Christians believe they have such an obligation because the Bible and Holy Tradition (for those who recognize it) say so.
Great Headline in the Daily Mail
AIDS research in crises as ‘miracle’ vaccines actually INCREASE chance of catching virus
Money quote:
The search for a cure for Aids was in crisis last night after it was revealed that two supposed “miracle” vaccines not only fail to protect people from the virus, but could put them at greater risk of becoming infected.
It is a massive blow to Aids research, which has ground to a halt – with seven other trials of similarly designed would-be vaccines either suspended or called off indefinitely.
AIDS researchers just might be the dumbest, most dangerous SOB’s on planet earth.
HankB
Dean,
I’m not sure I agree with your assessment of most Christians. While I believe most Christians would indicate that they themselves have such a moral obligation, I’m not sure how many of them would feel justified in forcing others to accept such an obligation at gunpoint.
And you’re absolutely correct about the question of where “rights” originate… but I was going to save that for a later poll. :-)
Great site, and I’m very impressed with the quality of the writing and the level of discourse here.
Except for Maniakes. I think he might be a ‘bot. :-)
— DW
Some early cherry blossoms for those that like pink (and poetry).
And if you prefer yellow, there’s forsythia.
JLBussey’s last blog post..Slow buds the pink dawn like a rose…
I was raised that one is obligated to return some service to one’s community or society not because you were born, but because your community provided you with many things while you were growing up: schooling, streets and parks, police and fire protection, etc etc etc. But I never understood that it was at the point of a gun, merely what you owed back.
JLBussey’s last blog post..Slow buds the pink dawn like a rose…
I would cite this as a clear example of biasing a poll with the phrasing of the question. I think very few people could honestly answer “Yes” to this, when taking into account all the conditions mentioned, even those who do support the sorts of social programs which this is obviously targeted at.
My obligations are to keep such promises as I choose to make, and to stay the hell out of the lives of the rest of you unless and until you invite me in.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
As a Christian I am obligated to help those less fortunate than myself to the extent I’m able. I do not believe the government really has any right to force me or anyone else to do so, nor do I have the right to force anyone else to do so.
I think its best to make such a decision on a case by case basis, one day at a time.
Sometimes, I might feel obligated to put a bullet in someone’s head.
Last Wednesday light from an exploding star was visible to the naked eye had anyone by chance been looking. The star was about 40 times larger than the sun, and about 7.5 billion light years away (a light year is almost 6 trillion miles). In other words it exploded when the universe was half it’s present age.
Sometimes I wish I had the power shown in Scanners. The evening news would be far more entertaining, at least for young boys.
Regarding positive rights, this reminds me of a great post at Q&O about the logical consequence of health care being considered a right:
http://www.qando.net/details.aspx?Entry=7964
Inv A. DeSoda’s last blog post..Good Friday
Fox’s Chris Wallace Takes Fox And Friends ‘To Task’ For ‘Two Hours Of Obama Bashing’
With video (:// removed from URL to bypass comment moderation)
http thinkprogress.org/2008/03/21/wallace-obama-fox/
Inv A. DeSoda’s last blog post..Good Friday
oh, the irony of my second moderated comment on this post.You’ll see what I mean soon enough
Inv A. DeSoda’s last blog post..Good Friday
If Obama is willing to meet with Ahmedinijad, why isn’t he willing to meet with Chris Wallace?
Inv A. DeSoda’s last blog post..Good Friday
Playing? If your kids are old enough you guys should play Wizardology. Completely unkown to me until I found it at Marshall’s (yes Marshalls!). Since I love magic and fantasy, I convinced my husband to buy it; now we are sort of hooked.
Anyway, great game, may go a bit long, but quite interesting and safe for everyone.
It should also be seen as part of the social contract: people band together into tribes and nations for mutual support and protection. Libertarians wrongly think that “protection” is the only legitimate function but it’s nonsense; government is there to make sure of things like that people are educated and don’t starve, and that’s been true throughout all of history and not just because modern socialists decreed it.
The modern innovation comes from those who claim government is *only* there to provide a military and courts. And most people reject it, rightly so. You have a wider obligation to the society that nurtured and educated and protected you and your family. Just as that society has obligations toward you, accepted the moment you were born.
Not sure exactly what it means (which maybe is the point), but data about ocean temp isn’t consistent with current understanding of “Global Warming.”
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88520025
And on another front, 7 years of work “completed,” the Kansas State University research reactor:
http://www.mne.ksu.edu/research/centers/reactor (Caveat: updating web site sacrificed to other work, i.e. out of date)
– licensed in 1968 to operate at 250 kW thermal power was relicensed this week (by the Nuclear Regualtory Comissison) to operate for another 20 years at power level up to 1.25 MW!!! I’ve been working on this since March 2000, following a few years of prior efforts by others.
We are currently supporting research with testing new types of radiation detectors, detection of improvised explosive devices, neutron radiography, nanoparticles, biofuels, characterizing air pollution, cancer treatment tools, archeology, geology, etc. etc. etc. and the power increase is going to help in a major way.
I AM PUMPED.
Dean,
Though you phrased it in slightly different words than I did, I’ll put you down for a “yes”… you believe that an enforcable (by force) obligation exists.
Heru, the question I asked is not meant to bias the poll. I asked the precise question I intended to ask. I’m trying to find out people’s opinions about “enforcable” (by force) obligations, as opposed to the type of obligation that one freely accepts upon themselves.
My values: I don’t believe that such obligations exist. Part of my value system is that I have no enforceable rights upon the actions of another person other than to cause them to refrain from harm to others.
Someone mentioned the social contract… and I wish folks would use a different term for that concept, because “social contract” is Orwellian double-speak. The word “contract” has a meaning, and it means a voluntary, informed agreement between two or more parties. By any reasonable definition of the word contract, I have never consented to “the social contract”. I’m not claiming here that I believe the concept of “social contract” is invalid (though I will make that argument at another time), but I am claiming that it is intentionally and misleadingly named.
To those that answered “yes”, (i.e., you believe that because you were born, other people have enforcable obligations towards you and vice-versa), to whom do you feel those obligations extend? Your family? Residents of your state? Residents of your nation? Only legal residents of your nation? All members of the human race?
I am *truly* not trying to lead a debate here… that comes later. I’m trying to discover what peope believe.
Thanks for indulging me with the feedback.
– DW
Certainly enforceable obligations exist. We have an obligation to respect others’ private property, for example, and if someone does not do that we can collectively punish them for it (it’s called fighting theft). We can force individuals in our community to band together for mutual protection, it’s called a military and a police force. We can force others to pay for the education of children, because we all collectively benefit from them and it’s destructively selfish to withhold that which the society has given you.
Libertarian economics are simplistic and silly, and not based on any ultimate logic or morality. In fact, they’re very immoral. They’re essentially a form of anarchism that embraces the idea that property rights are a greater right than any other form of right. But that’s just silly, which is why I’m no longer a libertarian.
Comments on this entry are closed.