Message from @Hexidecimark

Discord ID: 603624473341460482


2019-07-24 16:09:45 UTC  

Far left big gay

2019-07-24 16:09:58 UTC  

Chad right-libertarians reign supremeeeeeee

2019-07-24 16:10:16 UTC  

We disagree about the mechanics of your concept... That is literally the base point of the discussion. OFC we disagree about it...

2019-07-24 16:12:39 UTC  

I'm telling u the concept is wrongheaded in that it obfuscates the real value system behind it and claims universality while obviously rejecting it, and u get mad at me because I don't think it should be used...

2019-07-24 16:12:55 UTC  

And you seem to default to tradition as a justification for it

2019-07-24 16:13:30 UTC  

Tradition is an internally *coherent* justification for God, not for a rationalist philosophical concept.

2019-07-24 16:15:15 UTC  

Why is the value system behind a right important if the right itself is beneficial

2019-07-24 16:16:26 UTC  

The entire point is the utility of controlling a governing body's actions by directly setting its scope

2019-07-24 16:21:44 UTC  

This requires no religious component unless you assume people saying 'this seems right based on what we know' is somehow religious in nature

2019-07-24 16:25:05 UTC  

because weather it is beneficial or not is defined by the value system

2019-07-24 16:25:15 UTC  

*whether

2019-07-24 16:25:22 UTC  

that is what you gage the effect of the right by

2019-07-24 16:25:40 UTC  

"beneficial" means: good as far as my value system is concerned

2019-07-24 16:26:58 UTC  

Okay, so then you would naturally still gain from rights, but the rights would be different

2019-07-24 16:27:23 UTC  

what?

2019-07-24 16:27:32 UTC  

gain what?

2019-07-24 16:27:35 UTC  

Scope creep is bad

2019-07-24 16:27:44 UTC  

I'm not following at all

2019-07-24 16:27:54 UTC  

You do not want scope creep
So you limit the scope

2019-07-24 16:28:01 UTC  

scope of wat?

2019-07-24 16:28:09 UTC  

You will either use rights or an analogous system to accomplish this

2019-07-24 16:28:15 UTC  

scope of governmental bodies

2019-07-24 16:28:35 UTC  

if by analogous you mean something like "laws" then yes

2019-07-24 16:28:48 UTC  

the difference is that laws don;t make some claim to universality

2019-07-24 16:29:08 UTC  

Yeet

2019-07-24 16:29:09 UTC  

rights are a decalogue that is mutable

2019-07-24 16:29:13 UTC  

Mental gymnastics cancer

2019-07-24 16:29:16 UTC  

meaning it's not a decalogue

2019-07-24 16:29:16 UTC  

Then consider them laws for government

2019-07-24 16:29:55 UTC  

Because that is what they functionally *are*

2019-07-24 16:29:58 UTC  

cool, but then they are not some special cathegory

2019-07-24 16:30:06 UTC  

Correct

2019-07-24 16:30:08 UTC  

which is my point

2019-07-24 16:30:23 UTC  

All they are is laws

2019-07-24 16:30:36 UTC  

They are just distinct from laws in impact and scale

2019-07-24 16:30:49 UTC  

But they are effectively laws, yes

2019-07-24 16:31:06 UTC  

and laws need justification by some moral imperative

2019-07-24 16:31:12 UTC  

No, they do not

2019-07-24 16:31:23 UTC  

then ur laws are evil by definition

2019-07-24 16:31:43 UTC  

which is rather obviously a problem

2019-07-24 16:31:47 UTC  

I disagree with your values, you're just calling me different