Welcome. What you will find here will be my random thoughts and reactions to various books I have read, films I have watched, and music I have listened to. In addition I may (or may not as the spirit moves me) comment about the fantasy world we call reality, which is far stranger than fiction.
Friday, December 15, 2017
A Minute Meditation
Genuine tragedies in the world are not conflicts between right and wrong. They are conflicts between two rights. -- Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel -- How does one decide when faced with this conflict?
no offense, here, but... it's clever but it doesn't mean a whole lot imo... i doubt if there's anyone in the world who doesn't think he/she is "right"... on any particular question...
Mudpuddle, I have to disagree here with you. I think it's very hard to decide between two opposing views when both have a "right" on their side. So, it means "a whole lot" to me.
That may depend on the circumstances of their conflict, but I suspect the 'right' which is better at presenting or selling itself, or more competitive, or simply more aggressive, will have an edge. Sometimes there's not a rational choice to make, but simply a weighing of priorities -- each choice has its own rewards, so which rewards do we want most?
Stephen, I don't think Hegle is talking about right and left as political entities. He is talking about rights, such as those outlined in our own Bill of Rights. The conflict would therefore be between two of those rights.
Oh, that's what I meant. People can be faced with two rights, but one of them might be more aggressive, or better at marketing itself. Let's say I value both simple living and being prepared (or "prepping"); past a certain point, those are contradictory goals even if both are laudable.
R.T., and how do we choose today when there is no agreement as to the HP?
A number of years ago a neo-Nazi group wanted to march through a suburb of Chicago. Their right to freedom of speech, however, was infringed when the suburb government refused to allow them to march, citing its right to control what happens within its boundaries. Two rights in conflict. I don't have an HP to tell me how to resolve the conflict so that both rights are recognized.
The problem with 'Rights' is there is no agreed hierarchy to appeal to if one 'Right' conflicts with another - as they are wont to do from time to time. So when they do conflict we have nothing to appeal to except Law, Convention and what passes for Common Sense. Of course any such compromise leaves everyone unhappy - which, I suppose, is a pretty good definition of compromise itself.
CyberKitten, yes, that's where the tragedy comes in for both rights can't be satisfied and compromises are painful at best, depending upon the severity of the situation.
Fred: yes... sometimes i comment but nothing goes through; i think i may figured it out though... tx... actually, Mrs.M figured it out... i'm a dummy re computers...
no offense, here, but... it's clever but it doesn't mean a whole lot imo... i doubt if there's anyone in the world who doesn't think he/she is "right"... on any particular question...
ReplyDeleteMudpuddle, I have to disagree here with you. I think it's very hard to decide between two opposing views when both have a "right" on their side. So, it means "a whole lot" to me.
DeleteThat may depend on the circumstances of their conflict, but I suspect the 'right' which is better at presenting or selling itself, or more competitive, or simply more aggressive, will have an edge. Sometimes there's not a rational choice to make, but simply a weighing of priorities -- each choice has its own rewards, so which rewards do we want most?
ReplyDeleteStephen, I don't think Hegle is talking about right and left as political entities. He is talking about rights, such as those outlined in our own Bill of Rights. The conflict would therefore be between two of those rights.
DeleteOh, that's what I meant. People can be faced with two rights, but one of them might be more aggressive, or better at marketing itself. Let's say I value both simple living and being prepared (or "prepping"); past a certain point, those are contradictory goals even if both are laudable.
DeleteStephen, OK, I wasn't looking at it from that POV, so I misinterpreted your comment.
DeleteR.T., and if the conflict involves those?
ReplyDeleteR.T., and how do we choose today when there is no agreement as to the HP?
DeleteA number of years ago a neo-Nazi group wanted to march through a suburb of Chicago. Their right to freedom of speech, however, was infringed when the suburb government refused to allow them to march, citing its right to control what happens within its boundaries. Two rights in conflict. I don't have an HP to tell me how to resolve the conflict so that both rights are recognized.
R.T., Hegelis not talking about the conflict between right and wrong, but about the conflict between two rights.
DeleteThe problem with 'Rights' is there is no agreed hierarchy to appeal to if one 'Right' conflicts with another - as they are wont to do from time to time. So when they do conflict we have nothing to appeal to except Law, Convention and what passes for Common Sense. Of course any such compromise leaves everyone unhappy - which, I suppose, is a pretty good definition of compromise itself.
DeleteCyberKitten, yes, that's where the tragedy comes in for both rights can't be satisfied and compromises are painful at best, depending upon the severity of the situation.
Deletetesting
ReplyDeleteMudpuddle, you made it. Having problems?
DeleteFred: yes... sometimes i comment but nothing goes through; i think i may figured it out though... tx... actually, Mrs.M figured it out... i'm a dummy re computers...
DeleteMudpuddle, no problem. I understand as I'm no swifty with them either.
Delete