Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!genrad!decvax!harpo!floyd!vax135!ariel!houti!trc From: trc@houti.UUCP Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Altruism vs morality Message-ID: <330@houti.UUCP> Date: Wed, 29-Jun-83 18:20:33 EDT Article-I.D.: houti.330 Posted: Wed Jun 29 18:20:33 1983 Date-Received: Thu, 30-Jun-83 03:27:33 EDT Lines: 46 Response to F. Fite on individual rights and morality: Perhaps some of my notes have not gotten through to your site. I have posted a number of notes describing the objective basis for individual rights. Practically every other note has at least mentioned that the basis of individual rights is the individual human life. Perhaps what I have left out is a denunciation of altruism. To make it clear - altruism (along with mysticism) is one of the ideas that is rotting our civilization from within. Altruism is the idea that individuals should sacrifice their own interests for others, with no desire or hope of any benefit for themselves. The basis given for altruism is either mysticism (do it because God or Allah (etc) says it is the thing to do), or "power to the people". Either way, it boils down to arbitrary power of some over others' lives. There is no way to derive individual rights from altruism - they are incompatible. Some might argue that people could be benevolent, under altruism, and *act* as if they were respecting rights. But the very fact that it is considered as an act of benevolence, rather than an obligation one accepts by claiming to be human, contradicts the idea of "rights". A right is that which one should have regardless whether one does in fact get it. If one's rights are respected by others, it is not benevolence by the others, but simply doing what is correct. If those rights are violated by others, the rights still exist, and the violators have acted immorally. Altruism would claim as a right the ability of some group (the priests or the masses) to demand anything of any individual. That is, it would not only be all right for them to do so, but the individual would be evil if he resisted. (Note: an obligation to respect rights is not the same as a Duty. Duty implies something must be done without any reason other than that some superior entity demands it. "Duty to" can often be replaced by "Obey all whims of" - "Duty to the nation" becomes "Obey all whims of the nation". An obligation is based upon a personal choice.) If you truly WANT to find a basis for a valid government, you have only to read the work of Ayn Rand. She takes practically every common argument, claim, and idea of the altruist brand and exposes them for what they are - Anti-human life. If you are bored by philosophy, try "Atlas Shrugged", a novel which is interesting simply as a novel - though it also has several speeches by characters, in which they effectively summarize the ideas that have been presented. Tom Craver houti!trc