| Author |
Topic:
Declaration of Independence - Philosophical Issues
|
Philosopher1701
Registered:
Apr '05
|
Date Posted:
4/23/07 6:14pm
Subject:
Declaration of Independence - Philosophical Issues
|
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Are all people really created equal? Are they created at all? If there is no such "Creator", do humans really have the "rights" to life, freedom, etc.?
-----signature-----
The point of philosophy is to start with something so simple as not to seem worth stating, and to end with something so paradoxical that no one will believe it. ~Bertrand Russell
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Ender_Sai
Title: Manager Emeritus
Registered:
Feb '01
|
Date Posted:
4/23/07 6:17pm
Subject:
RE: Declaration of Independence - Philosophical Issues
|
I would wholly agree with Utilitarian founder Jeremy Bentham that there's no such thing as natural rights; they're rubbish on stilts. It's an insane, vain notion that's not grounded in anything more than misty idealism; rights are an agreement between peoples, and to varying degrees.
Jefferson was dead wrong and intellectually lazy to suggest that natural rights are "self-evident". If they were, he wouldn't have needed to say so.
So no, I refute the notion.
E_S
-----signature-----
In this truth he knew himself to be.
From sinking sands he stepped into light's embrace.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Lowbacca_1977
Title: Senate Moderator
Registered:
Jun '06
|
Date Posted:
4/23/07 6:28pm
Subject:
RE: Declaration of Independence - Philosophical Issues
|
|
If one were to say natural rights were "self-evident", then that would just mean that one wouldn't have to prove those statements true in order to use them. I'd think it similar to an axiom in geometry. As such, he's just saying which self-evident 'truths' the following claims rely upon. I don't think it has anything to do with whether or not he says they are self-evident truths.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Ender_Sai
Title: Manager Emeritus
Registered:
Feb '01
|
Date Posted:
4/23/07 6:40pm
Subject:
RE: Declaration of Independence - Philosophical Issues
- Date Edited:
4/23/07 6:59pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
Ender_Sai
|
I'm short on time, so forgive me for lazily defering to another to make my point.
If you and I are arguing about something and I reply, "It is obvious that I am right," I have added nothing to our dialog. I may as well have said, "I declare victory." If Jefferson--so often a golden-tongued hypocrite--was not consciously engaging in a debater's trick, he was taking an intellectual short-cut, using a tautology: "It is true because....it is true."
The article makes the same points I would.
E_S
-----signature-----
In this truth he knew himself to be.
From sinking sands he stepped into light's embrace.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
GrandAdmiralJello
Title:
Emperor
• EUC
• JCC
Registered:
Nov '00
|
Date Posted:
4/23/07 6:48pm
Subject:
RE: Declaration of Independence - Philosophical Issues
|
|
Thomas Jefferson was a political hobbyist who found nice-sounding phrases in his library and tried to apply them to the real world. He did not realize that things did not simply work that way.
-----signature-----
Roma Æterna|SPQR  Imperium Sine Fine "Moribus antiquis res stat Romana virisque" -Ennius, Annales "Tu regere imperio populos, Romanæ, memento;hæ tibi erunt artes; pascisque imponere morem, parcere subjectis et debellare superbos" -Virgil, Aeneid
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Darth_Guy
Registered:
Aug '02
|
Date Posted:
4/23/07 6:53pm
Subject:
RE: Declaration of Independence - Philosophical Issues
- Date Edited:
4/23/07 6:54pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
Darth_Guy
|
Ender_Sai posted:
Jefferson was dead wrong and intellectually lazy to suggest that natural rights are "self-evident". If they were, he wouldn't have needed to say so.
Actually, Benjamin Franklin added the "self-evident" part. Jefferson originally wrote, "We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable." 
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Lowbacca_1977
Title: Senate Moderator
Registered:
Jun '06
|
Date Posted:
4/23/07 7:37pm
Subject:
RE: Declaration of Independence - Philosophical Issues
|
|
Which doesn't address Ender's point, I think, of those claims not being defended thoroughly.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
dizfactor
Registered:
Aug '02
|
Date Posted:
4/23/07 9:10pm
Subject:
RE: Declaration of Independence - Philosophical Issues
|
|
I think that E_S, following Bentham, is pretty much dead-on about the idea of natural rights. Currently, though, I often find myself wondering whether or not they can serve as a sort of useful fiction. Usually Leo Strauss is my example that I use to caution myself against that sort of thinking, but still...
-----signature-----
"Play is going to be for the 21st century what steam was to the 19th century."
Julian Dibbell
"You gotta love an elite killing force that you can fool by putting on a hat."
Gryph
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
ShrunkenJedi
Registered:
Apr '03
|
Date Posted:
4/23/07 10:31pm
Subject:
RE: Declaration of Independence - Philosophical Issues
|
I don't really believe in natural rights, but I don't think it makes the passage completely irrelevant. Functionally, I tend to read: We hold these truths, that all humans are created equal, and that they are entitled while in the United States to unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Whether people are inherently, philosophically entitled to these rights... well, that's a different question. Not to mention that they're so vague that they're nearly impossible to enforce, what with one interpretation being that everyone is entitled to immortality.
-----signature-----
Fanficcer and Fanartist-- check the profile! My New Drabbles and Viggies: http://boards.theforce.net/the_saga/b10476/28153417/
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Jabbadabbado
Title: Senate Floor Moderator
Registered:
Mar '99
|
Date Posted:
4/24/07 2:19pm
Subject:
RE: Declaration of Independence - Philosophical Issues
- Date Edited:
4/24/07 2:23pm (3 edits total)
Edited By:
Jabbadabbado
|
The operative point here is a gentleman's agreement to declare these statements: "equal, endowed with rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness" to have the status of self-evident truth. If everyone agrees that these are the founding principles of the state, then that's the way it is, and no need to argue the point. They don't need to hold up to any objective test of reality or logic or plausibility. All that matters is we're in agreement.
The declaration of independence represents a declaration of a set of arbitrary values, sure, but that doesn't make it any less powerful.
It's not intellectually dishonest to take a stance on a set of foundational values, arbitrary or not.
-----signature-----
"There is a country out there where tens of millions
of white Christians, voting freely, selected as their
leader a black man of modest origin, the son
of a Muslim. There is a place on Earth - call it
America - where such a thing happens."
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
JediTre11
Registered:
Mar '01
|
Date Posted:
4/24/07 4:30pm
Subject:
RE: Declaration of Independence - Philosophical Issues
|
I've always understood "we hold these truths" as a declaration of assumption. Valid or not, its an assumption for the rest of the document and purposely avoids the debate in an effort to defy King George, rather than engage him in a philosophical debate. Which was being played out in Europe anyway. The philosophy isn't in the Declaration because it was everywhere else at the time.
If you want the rationale, you'd need more than Jefferson and Bentham. Thomas Paine, would be another good place to turn.
-----signature-----
There follows an untranslatable play on words with the use of local idiomatic expressions.
History B.A.
If no God, there must be at least a pattern-making demiurge. - Anthony Burgess
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
rogue_wookiee
Registered:
Apr '04
|
Date Posted:
4/24/07 6:26pm
Subject:
RE: Declaration of Independence - Philosophical Issues
|
Philosopher1701 posted:
Are all people really created equal?
Define equal.
Philosopher1701 posted:
Are they created at all?
You might recall that the document in question precedes Darwinism by almost 100 years.
Philosopher1701 posted:
If there is no such "Creator", do humans really have the "rights" to life, freedom, etc.?
The right to life is why murder has been a crime throughout human history. The right to freedom is why slavery is banned throughout the civilized world. The right to pursue happiness is capitalism.
-----signature-----
“You’re probably the biggest taxer in the country, even bigger than the Congress,” - Ron Paul on the Federal Reserve. Be aware of inflation and how it affects our daily life. http://mises.org/story/2914 -What You Should Know About Inflation
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
J-Rod
Registered:
Jul '04
|
Date Posted:
4/25/07 1:24pm
Subject:
RE: Declaration of Independence - Philosophical Issues
|
Ender_Sai posted:
I would wholly agree with Utilitarian founder Jeremy Bentham that there's no such thing as natural rights; they're rubbish on stilts. It's an insane, vain notion that's not grounded in anything more than misty idealism; rights are an agreement between peoples, and to varying degrees.
Jefferson was dead wrong and intellectually lazy to suggest that natural rights are "self-evident". If they were, he wouldn't have needed to say so.
So no, I refute the notion.
E_S
Self-evident? Of course. Our unique ability for self-determination is all the proof that is needed. As an inherited trait natural to all human beings, self-determination cannot be denied as part of a healthy functioning society. You can plainly see throughout history and throughout the world the chaos and suppression that inevitably follows the denial of self-determination on a society of any great size.
This is the reason Communism cannot work and Communistic governments become dictatorial almost without fail.
Now let's look at the "Creator." In the US, the government is beholden to the people. All are answerable to the "Creator"...however you believe Him to be. This means that America, as we are now, cannot be changed by man. We don't have that authority. Only He does.
This is the great folley of the Secularists. To believe as they do you must put into jeopardy the security of the very foundation of the law. Because to them, man can change these founding principles.
-----signature-----
God Bless George Bush God Bless Barack Obama Darth_wanderguard :"Maybe you're not quite as crazy as people say you are" 
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Ender_Sai
Title: Manager Emeritus
Registered:
Feb '01
|
Date Posted:
4/25/07 4:57pm
Subject:
RE: Declaration of Independence - Philosophical Issues
|
J-Rod, read the essay. Notions of "self-evidence" would allow for all kinds of whacky not-fun fun... 
E_S
-----signature-----
In this truth he knew himself to be.
From sinking sands he stepped into light's embrace.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Lowbacca_1977
Title: Senate Moderator
Registered:
Jun '06
|
Date Posted:
4/25/07 7:16pm
Subject:
RE: Declaration of Independence - Philosophical Issues
|
J-Rod posted:
Now let's look at the "Creator." In the US, the government is beholden to the people. All are answerable to the "Creator"...however you believe Him to be. This means that America, as we are now, cannot be changed by man. We don't have that authority. Only He does.
This is the great folley of the Secularists. To believe as they do you must put into jeopardy the security of the very foundation of the law. Because to them, man can change these founding principles.
I disagree with your criticism of secularists, as I don't think you need religion or the belief in a creator to consider some rights as fundamental. They're the basis of functioning society, imo, and as such, any country that intends to be functional must treat those rights as the base assumptions or axioms that a country can then be founded on.
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
J-Rod
Registered:
Jul '04
|
Date Posted:
4/26/07 12:44am
Subject:
RE: Declaration of Independence - Philosophical Issues
- Date Edited:
4/26/07 12:46am (1 edits total)
Edited By:
J-Rod
|
Ender_Sai posted:
J-Rod, read the essay. Notions of "self-evidence" would allow for all kinds of whacky not-fun fun...
E_S
Oh, I read it. He seemed to have an axe to grind with Jefferson:
If Jefferson--so often a golden-tongued hypocrite--was not consciously engaging in a debater's trick, he was taking an intellectual short-cut, using a tautology: "It is true because....it is true."
The problem with this guy, other than the fact that he will never do anything near as great as Jefferson or any of the Founding Fathers and appears to hate himself for that fact, is he seems to think that Jefferson was debating.
He wasn't. He was stating a fact: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Whether or not they are even true doesn't matter in the context of the Declaration of Independence. The fact that we believe them to be true and self-evident is the basis of the statement. And it is upon that belief in which we base our government.
And Lowbacca, after reading E-S's link, can you see now the folly to which I was referring?
-----signature-----
God Bless George Bush God Bless Barack Obama Darth_wanderguard :"Maybe you're not quite as crazy as people say you are"
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
