I have the right to try to change other people

A 'right'suggests a legal, moral or social imperative. No one can stop you from trying, but that doesn't mean you have a 'right'.

Don't you feel the claim is a tad arrogant? It's not very Tao..

Depends how and who.

arrogant how?

and no, i think it doesn't imply an imperative, necessarily -- my other claim addresses that.

i agree that "have the right" is unideal terminology; i was selecting for parallelism with Ivan's claim, and i think the intent is clear.

Rorek: I'm still hoping for an answer in another thread, as well, about when you feel you don't have such a right, and why.

Vynce; the only difference in yours and Ivan's claim is the acknowledgement that the effort might fail in your claim i.e. 'try'.

I'm thinking hard about what I don't like about this claim and I think it's because what is being changed is too wooley; I agree with Rorek; How and who is important here.

Yes. the only thing i disagree with about Ivan's claim is the implicit right to succeed.

Roly, you succeed in making us all curious. You are our jyte enigma.

Basically I think that I don't have a right to ask people to change in a way that doesn't affect me significantly and doesn't harm others. And the acceptable persistence in my attempt varies with these characteristics too.

the difference between "ask" and "receive" is large. however, i do think there are things that one has no right to ask -- such as when the asking serves as an attack or act of aggression.

I don't think the ability to try to change people is in any way a fundamental right. I think one has the right to do or say things that don't harm others or infringe upon their rights, but I don't believe anyone has a right to be free from attempts to change them, either.

"A 'right' suggests a legal, moral or social imperative."

No, it doesn't. That word is "duty".

D'A

"Right; what is just or fair; what one is entitled to. Morally good, in accordance with justice" Oxford English Dictionary.

Just because there is another word with a similar meaning D'A, does'nt make my definition incorrect. Maybe get a better dictionary? Read more? Ask me if you are not sure?

none of what you just quoted suggests any imperative.

"imperative; essential or obligatory" "Social; living in an organised community" = "morally good, in accordance with justice" morals and justice are social constructs that usually essential or abligatory in society *sigh*

Vynce. You are nit-picking and you are not fact-checking. Plus, I am waiting patiently for D'A to turn up and blow his lid over my patronising response to his comment and I don't want to difuse or divert him; I love it when he freaks..

i totally disagree that something which is morally good is inherently obligatory.

having a right to do something means you may; having a duty means you must. these things are completely separate and there's a reason. this is not nit picking.

it'll be a long wait today, i suspect. and i would be surprised if it never happens; i expect he ignores you by now precisely because it's not worth sinking to your level when you try to troll him.

Oh shut up Vynce and get a sense of humour

OK, can you tell me where you got yours? it looks like it was cheap.

Ha! HILARIOUS (not)

I'm not sure that equation is valid with the inclusion of Ha factorial. It might just be nonsense.

Packers, that's one of the cheapest and stupidest rhetorical tricks in the book.

And it's beneath civilized debate.

Let's assume you did it by accident.

There is only one definition of right in the claim that makes sense of the two you stated. There is only one that fits grammatically.

So, you know which one is being used. It's also the one D'Arch used.

Your complaint is as sensible as if you objected because you personally were using the definition the opposite direction of left and then yelled at him for not reading your mind or responding as if that definition of right were being used.

So, you trolled someone deliberately seeking an emotional reaction because you thought it would be fun, rather than engaging in actual debate and discussion.

And by the gods, I do try to give people what they want. So, here you go. You got what you asked for. Not quite what you may have wanted or expected, but that is exactly what is supposed to happen when people ask for things. I hope you enjoy it.

Now, maybe you can move on to actual mature discussion on this site and not sidetrack people with children's games. Otherwise we can start talking about existing unicorns and whether or not they exist.

@Rachel; Vynce is perfectly able to defend himself.. Please don't pretend that your bilious outpouring has anything to do with my joke with D'A ... you and Vynce run in a pack... trolling.

[aside] you really do have a tendencey to overate your effect on others... "here goes, you asked for it!" Oooooh! Pahleeez! Get over yourself.

Your comment has no connection to my points. What I said did, in fact, have no relation to Vynce. And I had no estimation of my effect on others. I simply was doing what I do. I tried to explain it. If you have questions, you may ask them, although you shouldn't need me to explicitly state that.

"trolling"

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

Not that that's surprising.

D'A
... putting you back in my killfile with the rest of the trolls.

i'm sure she gets the concept -- here's a perfect description of it, from her own comments:

"I am waiting patiently for D'A to turn up and blow his lid over my patronising response to his comment and I don't want to difuse or divert him; I love it when he freaks."