Message from @Deleted User
Discord ID: 504838662958219266
Does it dictate us?
No, natural law is what humans wrote down as an observation of mutually beneficial behavior
It's like saying scientists are obliged to follow the scientific method
They just *do it* as a quality of BEING a scientist
Do they not also do it because if they claim something without using the scientific method said claim is disregarded by the scientific community?
Basically making it essential for a scientist
Well yeah, it helps, but if they don't "use it", then they're not really doing science in the first place.
A self-respecting one that is
It was a half assed metaphor anyways, but you get my point. It's a chicken/egg thing
Yeah
Regarding the law thing, I think most are made out of interest
Like I said, property rights could be seen as people with property wanting protection for their shit without them having to guard it 24/7
Thus making a law for it so that they can prosecute someone violating their property rights
No, not really at all
It's more like "What are some common denominators that are considered 'OK' for people to be violent over?"
Life, Liberty, Property
In any of those situations, the common person would be like "Oh, okay, I understand. Yeah, he's free to go."
So, in a sense, "natural rights" although existing in a hypothetical 'Natural stateless society' still presupposes that there *is indeed a society.*
Natural rights do not exist in a vacuum.
Yes, they need people and they need an organized society
Not what I meant, tbh
And if there are certain laws you need to be able to enforce them
Let me rephrase: Natural rights presuppose that there is someone around to violate them in the first place.
There could be, but there is no guarantee that there is
Stop and rethink that
What I meant is that there is no absolute guarantee that there will be someone around to violate said rights
There very well could be though
okay, I feel like we're talking past each other here
Yeah same
My take on natural rights/laws is that for them to be natural, they need to be inherent to people
I'm supposing that you are the literal last man on earth.
You now have no need for natural rights, because there's no one to violate them.
That is a pretty solid statement, can’t argue with it
I think its an important place to start from
Add in a second person, and what happens?
The only reason you would ever defend yourself against them is for your life, liberty, or your property.
There's your natural rights. The mutually agreed upon reasons for instigating violence.
That is also true
But I just thought of something regarding the laws and rights situation
You would need at least 3 people for such systems to work
Since you have two people against each other, but you’d also need a neutral arbiter to break the stalemate
Why?