Korean Job Discussion Forums

Big_Bird

Rather interesting discussion:

Do future generations have rights? 1

Do future generations have rights? 2

Privateer · Joined: 31 Aug 2005 Location: Easy Street.

It is much easier to argue they don't have rights - they don't exist, therefore they can't have any rights, QED - but much less interesting, I think.

Do we have a duty to future generations? I think this comes down to the question: do we have the right to permanently damage the environment in some way, or use up all of an existing non-renewable resource, knowing it will create huge problems after we are gone? Or do we just let them look out for themselves? Apres mois le deluge. This is not a question for (ordinary) individuals, of course, but a political one.

If you answer that we have no duty, logically you should be prepared to take it to any extreme. Suppose we could as a society live in unparalleled luxury for our lifetimes but it would mean the extinction of the species in the future? Most (sane) people would balk at that if only out of concern for their own children or other younger relations (or friends if childless). We are connected to the generation after us and, through them, to the generation following that, and so on ad infinitum. It is not possible to disconnect ourselves, either as individuals or as a generation, from the rest.

The Korean way of looking at it is not as a duty to future generations but as a debt to the previous ones, which has the advantage that those are people that at least once had definite existence. From whichever perspective you look at it, I think it impossible to accept that our only obligation not to destroy the world arises out of self-interest, which expires when we do.

Besides, to condemn the world to destruction after we die is still not without consequences for ourselves, for it means that the succeeding generation or generations will all have reason to hate us, and no-one wants to end up on their deathbed hated and alone.

I was going to say it's a bit like any situation where relationships between one party and another are about to be terminated like, say, the end of a contract in Korea. All bets are off. Given that I am about to exit the scene permanently, I have no material incentive to fulfill any duties that I don't feel like performing. And my counterparts are more likely to start changing their behaviour too, whether it's the hagwon boss who cheats you out of your severance or the formerly loving children who suddenly start pressuring a poor guy on his deathbed to sign a new will.

I was going to say that, but it seems like a better analogy is with the guy who makes a pact with the devil, lives the high life for a few decades - and then loses his soul.

JMO · Joined: 18 Jul 2006 Location: Daegu

If future generations have rights, is mast*rbation murder?

some of the words beeped on here are ridiculous...

Juregen · Joined: 30 May 2006

People seem to be assuming that rights are only for the living?

Julius · Joined: 27 Jul 2006

"people focus on their rights far too much these days, instead of their responsibilities".

-as my father always said...

igotthisguitar · Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 4:11 am Post subject:

SUBMIT !!! Twisted Evil

JMO · Joined: 18 Jul 2006 Location: Daegu

Big_Bird · Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 2:08 am Post subject:

JMO · Joined: 18 Jul 2006 Location: Daegu

mindmetoo · Joined: 02 Feb 2004

Rights are what people accord themselves or others or take for themselves. The not yet born can't take rights. I'm not sure you can convince many that we need to protect future generations via a constitutional amendment. Surely, many believe we have a moral responsibility. And that's where it lies and should lie. People should be free to make an ethical decision as they see fit.

igotthisguitar · Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 5:34 am Post subject:

Rights?

Ha, sure ... but only if you pay your pumkin ... "tax".

Tax Law: Are You Eating Those Pumpkins?
AP - Tue Oct 30, 10:18 PM ET

DES MOINES, Iowa - The Iowa Department of Revenue is taxing jack-o'-lanterns this Halloween.

The new department policy was implemented after officials decided that pumpkins are used primarily for Halloween decorations, not food, and should therefore be taxed, said Renee Mulvey, the department's spokeswoman. Confused

MORE ...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071031/ap_on_fe_st/pumpkin_tax
;_ylt=Ar1teDiLngp9tbXfkSBFmBsDW7oF

ernie · Joined: 05 Aug 2006 Location: asdfghjk

don't people who are born have the right not to live in debt? the people who say "future generations are not real, so they don't have rights" are missing the point entirely! that's like saying "well, tomorrow isn't real, so i might as well do whatever i want today"...

i'm sure you don't really believe this, because you wouldn't be working today if that was the case!

mindmetoo · Joined: 02 Feb 2004

mindmetoo · Joined: 02 Feb 2004

ernie · Joined: 05 Aug 2006 Location: asdfghjk

people have the right to live foolishly, as long as they don't infringe on the rights of others... by your logic, if i planted a bomb and set it to go off in the future, i wouldn't be evil because tomorrow isn't "real"!

if you seriously believe that future generations don't have the right to live without debt and crippling pollution, i believe you have serious ethical problems bordering on the psychopathic...