Little Shop of Knowledge

Persons, Rights, and the Moral Community

by Loren E. Lomasky

 

We began our quest into Persons, Rights and the Moral Community but seeing that not only was it very much challenging in itself but it was to be done parallel to many other readings and activities we decided to postpone or call off the approach. I believe this was wise, we weren’t making much out of it or out of any of the other books, to finish it just to say that “we did it” wouldn’t have been honest and would’ve missed the whole point of honest learning at the MPC. As Emerson puts it “my life is for itself and not for a spectacle”, it might seem like a “failure” but at least we started a quest into the first two chapters of the book.

 

                         WHAT IS BEING SAID

 

What is Morality? Where do rights come from? Who holds these rights?

 

There’s a huge problem when defining who has moral rights. Who are the right holders and who are the members of the moral community? The moral community being those individuals who hold rights.

 

“Concern for rights is a necessary cornerstone in the design of a social ethic, but it should not be confused for the complete edifice.”

 

Lomasky talks about rights, he says they are valid simply by the fact that we can conceive of them and evoke them, yet he centers his inquiry into a deeper issue, who holds these rights? He says that people are within themselves values (upholding Individualism as the corner stone he will use to build his case upon) and that’s why they must be able to hold rights. This isn’t such an easy response though. While some may claim to hold the rights to life, liberty and property others not only claim that hey also hold these rights and include other rights such as education, health, and even paid vacations. Who is then to provide for these rights? Are rights something that can’t be taken away from the individual or rather something that must be provided for by other individuals? If that is the case wouldn’t this interrupt other people’s life plans? All of these questins and even more are addressed in Lomasky’s section called The Welter of Rights. (Welter is very much like a muddle or confusion). Who has what rights? What rights are valid to have?

 

“Concern for Basic Rights is concern for the individualism they present.”

 

What Lomasky proposes is a different perspective of looking at morality as a set of rules that are necessary within a society of people who have projects. Life projects define what you want to do with your life, if everyone has life projects then we need a system that allows each person to fulfill their projects.

 

“Rights without foundations are treacherous entities. How are we to adjudicate between contending rights – or “rights”?”