Philosophy How do you justify rights?

[Second Summer]

I came across the question in the title somewhere else, and thought it would be a good topic here. The original quote is by Roger Scruton, a writer, philosopher and former editor of the Salisbury Review, which is a British conservative magazine.

Rather than retreating from the Enlightenment, therefore, conservatives should confront liberal ideas on their own ground. The real question is not "How do you justify authority? But "How do you justify rights?" Maybe there are no rights; and maybe the whole idea of equality is an illusion. If that is so, then the liberal assumption of the moral and intellectual high ground is spurious. We are faced with a confrontation not between and enlightenment and prejudice but between two kinds of prejudice.

Full article: http://www.churchoftheeuropeans.org/Godless Atheism.html

 

[beancounter]

All the rules and philosophies we live by are human constructs. There are no universal truths, so you can't really justify rights on any other basis than the agreement of the majority to recognize rights.

 

[Second Summer]

All the rules and philosophies we live by are human constructs. The are no universal truths, so you can't really justify rights on any other basis than the agreement of the majority to recognize rights.

Yes, this is what I think as well. Of course, there might be convincing arguments why we should recognize particular rights. And it seems intuitive that all members of a group who are in some objective sense equal should enjoy the same rights. But if say, the majority of citizens of some faraway county is of the opinion that women are somehow sufficiently different from men, and should therefore not enjoy the same rights, then it seems our arguments to the contrary can't really claim universal validity. If you know what I mean ...? So if we are to impose our morals on them, as some think we should do, then our only argument is really "because we feel our morals are better". Or am I missing something?