Effectively, of the Locke nature it deduced the democracy, Filmer the autocracy, Cumberland the individual property, Morelly the collective property. With methods of the natural law and for what it respects the question of justice, it can be demonstrated to everything e, therefore, nothing. From there drift that Bobbio strengthens its historical interpretation of the rights. A right depends in a similar way on definitive historical moment, being that, what is basic now can not be at another historical moment, that new necessities can emerge bringing in its bulge the regulation. What it was sacred and inviolable in the century past, does not make the minimum difference for we today, as well as has regulated today what our ancestor never made idea. The problem of the absolute bedding based in the nature human being also esbarra in the question of the culture. In some cultures the men have right more the five women or, since that he can keep them. In other countries, the momogamy is an imperative.
This can sound more as to have that right, to have only one woman, but in comparison with the women of the South Africa, for example, the woman has the right of an exclusive husband, right that it does not attend the African south woman. For these and others, that is, for the question of the historicidade of the rights and the culture, it is difficult to speak in absolute bedding, less still in absolute bedding of the rights in the nature human being. The search of an absolute bedding for the rights of the man appeared relativismo from fear, but the relativismo, as Bobbio is stronger argument in favor of the right of the man, is enough to think about as he is relative to be religious or not and the right the religion of it is arraigados between the men. .
| September 4th, 2020 | Posted in News |