tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7378568575885387942.post2340510047053561149..comments2024-02-18T18:59:06.164+00:00Comments on Econosophy and other musings: There is no such thing as a RightTobyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16258136994278139356noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7378568575885387942.post-85091058451502623712009-11-14T17:30:18.363+00:002009-11-14T17:30:18.363+00:00Thank you Edwardo, both for reading and commenting...Thank you Edwardo, both for reading and commenting (the compliment was very nice too!)<br /><br />The flaw you mention was in my mind when writing, hence the last paragraph. As with all my postings here the intent is to provoke discussion, not lay down the law. That said, I think an obligation-oriented society would foster more independence, or at least be geared more to independence and maturity, than a rights-based one. The challenge is in the education. <br /><br />I am reading John Taylor Gatto right now, who is violently reaffirming my belief in a complete, root and branch reform of education. I recommend him highly. We are nowhere near close to a decent education and have very little clue what type of humans we could produce if we allowed ALL of them a decent and relevant education. <br /><br />Rights don't exist, whereas obligations are logical consequences of being alive. Not seeking perfection, I stress the obligation side as being the more likely to produce sustainability and cooperation, not to mention emotional maturity and true independence of thought, things the current system wants to squash forever.Tobyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16258136994278139356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7378568575885387942.post-47746147490955537092009-11-14T14:41:31.290+00:002009-11-14T14:41:31.290+00:00Brilliant stuff Toby, but to my mind your construc...Brilliant stuff Toby, but to my mind your construction has a flaw.<br /><br />You wrote:<br /><br />"Obligations don’t need defending, for they encourage cooperation and commitment to ongoing, general betterment. They need to be recognised, understood, and lived. Rights are inalienable and therefore unlearned, requiring no wisdom to be demanded, nor any sense of the consequences when they are acted on. Obligations are learned and then owned, almost as a process of osmosis."<br /><br />-Recognized, understood, and lived, yes, however, I fear there is more to it. Unfortunately, just as "Rights", require defense, by the same token, so too do obligations often require enforcement. This is because, ultimately, obligations are analogous to contracts. And as we know, contracts quite often go unfulfilled, necessitating a third party to step into the breach for the purpose of forcing fulfillment. <br /><br />It seems to me there is a certain amount of pick your poison when choosing between a rights based society and one built on obligations. The other difficulty with the idea of an obligations based society, or so it seems to me, is that it has the whiff of coercion about it.Edwardohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03613197383283896190noreply@blogger.com