Difference between revisions of "Natural Rights"
From Critiques Of Libertarianism
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
[[Category:Rights|200]] | [[Category:Rights|200]] | ||
[[Category:Failures Of Libertarian Philosophy|100]] | [[Category:Failures Of Libertarian Philosophy|100]] | ||
| − | {{DES | des = Natural Rights has always been a propaganda term, from its first invention as an answer to the rights of kings. Nobody has yet really answered [[Jeremy Bentham]]'s charge of "[[Anarchical Fallacies/Nonsense on stilts|nonsense on stilts]]". Most libertarianism ([[Nozick]], for example) is still behind the times here. | show=}} | + | {{DES | des = Natural Rights has always been a propaganda term, from its first invention as an answer to the rights of kings. Nobody has yet really answered [[Jeremy Bentham]]'s charge of "[[Anarchical Fallacies/Nonsense on stilts|nonsense on stilts]]". Most libertarianism ([[Nozick]], for example) is still behind the times here. Also known as "unalienable rights" or "inalienable rights". | show=}} |
Natural rights are exactly as knowable as invisible pink unicorns: anybody can fantasize them any way they want. During the Enlightenment, when liberalism was invented, liberal natural rights were a propaganda tool used to undermine the equally fictitious natural rights of kings. But even among liberals there was no agreement about whether slaveholding was a natural right or not, because natural rights are really just words. Bentham famously dismissed the idea of natural rights as "nonsense on stilts". Unfortunately, most libertarians (including Nozick) start with this philosophical abomination rather than more factual alternatives. | Natural rights are exactly as knowable as invisible pink unicorns: anybody can fantasize them any way they want. During the Enlightenment, when liberalism was invented, liberal natural rights were a propaganda tool used to undermine the equally fictitious natural rights of kings. But even among liberals there was no agreement about whether slaveholding was a natural right or not, because natural rights are really just words. Bentham famously dismissed the idea of natural rights as "nonsense on stilts". Unfortunately, most libertarians (including Nozick) start with this philosophical abomination rather than more factual alternatives. | ||
