Message boards :
Politics :
Entitled
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
As I replied earlier Sarge, there is an enforceable legal entitlement, an optional moral one, and also one by common convention, and another by basic good manners. e.g. Most of the above falls into the definition Pasi posted from oxford dictionaries, specifically legal right or just cause. There a re a couple that do not: I believe I am entitled to an apology because I think you have insulted me. A person thinking they were insulted does not necessarily make it so, thus is not grounds for an entitlement to an apology. Elder people are entitled to respect from younger people. There are some that believe the passing of years is just cause for an entitlement to respect. I don't believe this is correct, to my way of thinking respect is earned by deeds done, not by the number of years lived. I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
Terror Australis Send message Joined: 14 Feb 04 Posts: 1817 Credit: 262,693,308 RAC: 44 |
To Sarge, my interpretation of "entitled" is "I am entitled to this because I morally have earned the right to it." Maybe rather than merely feeling "entitled" to the goods they have looted, the London rioters feel "entitled" (morally) to the means of earning them legitimately (i.e. a job) and are aggrieved because this entitlement has been taken away from them by government policy which is robbing the poor to prop up the filthy rich. There is nothing more aggravating than having to pay for someone else's greed and screw ups. Civil disobediance is the only method of protest available to the powerless. T.A. |
Terror Australis Send message Joined: 14 Feb 04 Posts: 1817 Credit: 262,693,308 RAC: 44 |
the London rioters feel "entitled" (morally) to the means of earning them legitimately (i.e. a job) OK. I'll change that to entitled to the opportunity for employment. See you over on the UK Riots thread. T.A. |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
Mr. Buffet speaks his mind. Despite his wealth, he keeps a sense of fair play. A very rare commodity on wall street. Now, Soft, I cannot go read every post you've ever written, and I doubt you've read all of mine (ever while as a mod), but really, you have no basis for thinking Buffet's view is one I disagree with. I have not said one way or the other, explicitly or implicitly in this or any other thread. While he is not a politician, I have indeed made a decent case for how bringing up his statements from yesterday are indeed being used in this thread as partisan talking points (while none of those bringing him up are, presumably, politicians either). So, to cut to the chase regarding what I've asked: you and I are essentially in agreement as to what "entitled" means, though I suspect people can think they are entitled to something when they are not. However, indeed, I was stating "I want this" is a statement of selfishness. Now, let's see what others think. |
Michael John Hind Send message Joined: 6 Feb 07 Posts: 1330 Credit: 3,632,028 RAC: 0 |
ENTITLED...an interesting word. What are you actually entitled to. 1). The body that your born with. 2). The air that you breath. 3). Natural Bodily functions. 4). To mate. 5). To have offspring. 6). To eat. 7). To drink. 8). To communicate. 9). To defend yourself. ....All things given to you by Mother Nature. A RIGHT....anything beyond the above as these then become yours through decree. An example of Entitlement or Rights....You are not Entitled to dole money, it's yours by Right of decree though to receive it. Rights can be taken away Entitlements can not. But unfortunately some people try to take these Entitlements away from others. Here the law steps in to give you rights to enable you to protect your Entitlements. Hence we have confusion today regarding what is an Entitlement and what is actually only a right through decree. What people now get through Right of decree they now assume to be an Entitlement. Although Rights and Entitlement appear to be the same thing they are actually completely different in meaning so represent two different propositions. |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
I don't know which generation you grew up in, but in mine, it was considered the right and proper thing to do, to respect your parents and grandparents. Your elders have lived a lot longer than you, which means they are probably quite wise and have a lot of experience and advice which they could pass on. Old ideas and customs are no more worthy respect simply because they are old. When I see youngsters today say to an older person shuffling along the footpath, Oi, get out the way you silly old git, I just totally despair. I think you are wrong, but you are entitled to your opinion. The despair I feel at such a scene is that the youngsters are not respecting another person regardless of the age of that other person. I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
Well Bobby, we are just going to have to agree to disagree then aren't we :-) Chris, you are correct that you did directly answer my question, but I have to think some more about how your response fits in and how it helps address the inspiration of my asking the question. I grant T.A. "entitlement" to discuss the UK rioting/looting here, as it fits in the "entitled" question, since, as I said, my asking the question was inspired by post of Gary's in that thread. Chris, I do not recall what it is that makes me think this, but I believe Bobby and I are around the same age, and Es is just a couple years younger than me. So, think of us as your nieces and nephews. Keep in mind, though, that Dune is now your brother-in-law, because he's my uncle too! As for elders being entitled respect: I suspect Bobby thinks in a way similar to me. (If not, he can say so.) Pragmatically. Here's an analogy. I would like to think that people start out inherently good. I would like to walk the streets of a city after sundown and not worry about being mugged, and not go around suspicious of anybody regardless of what they look like. I try to either treat people I run across in that or similar situations either well or at least neutrally. But that doesn't stop me from keeping my guard up when I am walking the streets. So, for the elderly, maybe what I would say, and perhaps what Bobby would say as well, is not that you are entitled to respect, but you should not be accorded disrespect simply for being older. (While many elderly may have wisdom to pass on, check out recent reports on the elderly couple that have written books on raising children, with no educational background in this, claiming that The Bible states God wants parents to inflict physical pain in their punishments. A couple that read one of their books beat their (adopted?) daughter to death!!!) |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
ENTITLED...an interesting word. An interesting list, if a person is entitled to eat, and yet does not have the funds to purchase food, are they entitled to steal it from another? Presumably so, as the list does not include entitlements to property. The depiction of entitlements vs rights by decree strikes me as not dissimilar to Hobbes view in The Leviathan, I prefer Rousseau's view On The Social Contract. I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
Michael John Hind Send message Joined: 6 Feb 07 Posts: 1330 Credit: 3,632,028 RAC: 0 |
ENTITLED...an interesting word. I clearly forgot to include "Common sense" in my list too. Hobbes view, Rousseau's view neither, I form my own views. Therefore they are my views and not views formed by the influences coming from others. |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
ENTITLED...an interesting word. Assuming "common sense" includes the entitlement to property, who decides which entitlement has precedence? I say assuming mainly because it has been my experience that common sense is not so common (to paraphrase Voltaire). Also note, I did not say your views were the same as Hobbes, merely that they were similar, nor did I say that mine were Rousseau's, merely that I preferred his over Hobbes. I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
rebest Send message Joined: 16 Apr 00 Posts: 1296 Credit: 45,357,093 RAC: 0 |
ENTITLED...an interesting word. Interesting indeed. If we are all entitled to the air that we breathe and the water that we drink, wouldn't we be within our rights to demand that others not foul the water and pollute the air? By their actions, are not polluters willfully infringing on the rights of everyone? According to your definition #9, I am within my rights to defend myself against those who would pollute my air and my water. Grab your pitchforks! We're off to the power plant! Who's driving? :) Join the PACK! |
BarryAZ Send message Joined: 1 Apr 01 Posts: 2580 Credit: 16,982,517 RAC: 0 |
Rousseau's views were curiously at variance with his personal life or reality. He'd probably be a Tea Party advocate today <g>
|
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
Rousseau's views were curiously at variance with his personal life or reality. He'd probably be a Tea Party advocate today <g> Quite possibly so. Wasn't really the point I was ham fistedly making. Michael's comment about rights by decree, suggested to me that within a state there was absolute power vested in a ruler (or state) who had authority to make such decrees, and thus Hobbesian. Rousseau's view is more in common with the US ideal that it is the people that are sovereign and rights are not made by decree, they are made by agreement of the (to my mind rightly) sovereign people. I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
BarryAZ Send message Joined: 1 Apr 01 Posts: 2580 Credit: 16,982,517 RAC: 0 |
Rousseau certainly took views which were antithetical to Hobbes (might well have been personal animosity there). But in Rousseau's "Discourse on the Origin of Inequality" he advocates a far more primitive state of man than even the early Confederation. He acknowledges there NO sovereign rights at all. Instead he envisions the simplicity of savage man (pre-language) as being the ideal. Then again, Rousseau's writings strike me as largely being arguments and discourses for the sake of argument and discourse -- not really advocacy. Rousseau's view is more in common with the US ideal that it is the people that are sovereign and rights are not made by decree, they are made by agreement of the (to my mind rightly) sovereign people. |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
ENTITLED...an interesting word. I'm sure people will continue to try to deconstruct this. Not sure this post (yours or my response) helps the conversation. Entitled to mate? I am pretty sure that female lifeforms (i.e., not just human) around the world and throughout history (and prehistory) have "refused" (denied access to) certain males. These days. amongst we humans? Yeah, that really sounds like a good idea, claiming you are "entitled" to mate with a woman you want. I don't think that is going to go over very well. |
Uli Send message Joined: 6 Feb 00 Posts: 10923 Credit: 5,996,015 RAC: 1 |
Sarge, I didn't read it that way. Pluto will always be a planet to me. Seti Ambassador Not to late to order an Anni Shirt |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
Neither did I. I read it as being entitled to an offspring with a willing partner. Not that I necessarily agree with the list, and certainly the list can be shortened due to some of the items covering the others already on the list if you truly want to be minimalist. |
Michael John Hind Send message Joined: 6 Feb 07 Posts: 1330 Credit: 3,632,028 RAC: 0 |
Neither did I. I read it as being entitled to an offspring with a willing partner. No, no minimalist's only expansionist's....Come-up with your own list Ozz, that would be interesting. |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
No, no minimalist's only expansionist's....Come-up with your own list Ozz, that would be interesting. That by any other name is still... You can call it "expansionist", but that doesn't mean it is not "minimalist" by some views. I couldn't possibly try to come up with a definitive list. For any list would certainly be subjective to the person and those who tend to agree. Regardless if it is a majority or a minority who agrees with any particular list, it doesn't change the views of those subjectively agreeing with it. Ultimately, it doesn't behoove me to define such a list, as quite frankly any list really doesn't matter. It is only another means to argumentative fodder for those that wish to define a way for man to live. |
Michael John Hind Send message Joined: 6 Feb 07 Posts: 1330 Credit: 3,632,028 RAC: 0 |
No, no minimalist's only expansionist's....Come-up with your own list Ozz, that would be interesting. Ozz, you would make a fine "politician", go on, commit yourself to your Peers and be damned for it.."As they say"... |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.