Gandhian Conception It is against, this background that Gandhian concepts appear to resolve the issue of Human Rights in contemporary world. Gandhi was pragmatic enough to realize that attainment of human freedom was beset with many problems. “Life is not one straight road. There are so many complexities in it. It is not like a train which once started, keeps on running” . In Gandhi's view, from the down civilization, the rights of man have been a refuge against arbitrary use or determined depredation by the human right, a rallying cry of resistance to tyranny and oppression. With the passage of time, these rights gained recognition in a systematic way in different forms in various parts of the world, these rights found expression in a number of declarations and institutional frameworks. Important Contributions made so far, however, lack conceptual totality of human rights and are mainly western. The Gandhian thought has a dynamic concept of human rights, universal in its approach, comprehensive in its content and reaffirming the principle that man is the measure of the Universe. It...
Human rights are the rights in which all the human beings are entitled by virtue of their being as a human (Manchester University Press, 2001). The concept of the human rights itself is an abstract. However, when it is applied, it has the direct and enormous impact on the daily life of the people in the world. How the human rights applied in the broader circumstance is really having a long journey. Until in 1945, after the World War II, the United Nations (UN) was established as one of the effort to uphold the human rights to encourage the governments in promoting and guarding the human rights. Human rights are a central element of international law and also the UN Charter’s broad approach for the international peace and security
The philosophy of rights has been a perennial subject of discussion not only because it is embedded in the intellectual tradition and political practices of many countries but also because it exhibits deep divisions of opinion on fundamental matters. Even a cursory survey of the literature on rights since, say, the time of the Second World War would turn up a number of perplexing questions to which widely divergent answers have been given: What are rights? Are rights morally fundamental? Are there any natural rights? Do human rights exist? Are all the things listed in the UN's Universal Declaration (of 1948) truly rights? What are moral rights? Legal rights? Are basic moral rights compatible with utilitarianism? How are rights to be justified? What is the value of rights? Can infants have rights, can fetuses have them, or future generations, or animals? And so on.
Nature vs. Nurture The relative contributions of nature and nurture are an apparent part of human development which makes us ask the question, are heredity and environment opposing forces?(Sternberg 100) The question of nature vs. nurture can be examined and can be attempted to be comprehended in many ways. Our stand on which theory is the correct one is obviously a matter of opinion and makes us wonder if only one of them is truly correct. Nurture seems to be the explanation that holds the most tangible evidence to support it as existing in our everyday life. In psychological attempts to conduct experiments of genetic influences on personality and behavior in the environment psychologists have come to the conclusion that the best way is by using identical twins. There are strong similarities identical twins show in intelligence, personality, and many other characteristics, regardless of being raised in separate homes. They leave us with the conclusion that maybe there is some truth to the theory of nature. These findings from the studies done on the twins are what I find to be coincidences. I believe from my past experiences with my development as a person compared to my older sisters, we are a perfect example of nurture. The theory that poses enough evidence through studies and in my personal experience seems to be true. My sister and I, though not twins, have a four year difference between us and are completely different people who are were raised in the same environment....
What is Gandhian philosophy? It is the religious and social ideas adopted and developed by Gandhi, first during his period in South Africa from 1893 to 1914, and later of course in India. These ideas have been further developed by later "Gandhians", most notably, in India, Vinoba Bhave and Jayaprakash Narayan. Outside of India some of the work of, for example, Martin Luther King Jr. can also be viewed in this light. Understanding the universe to be an organic whole, the philosophy exists on several planes - the spiritual or religious, moral, political, economic, social, individual and collective. The spiritual or religious element, and God, is at its core. Human nature is regarded as fundamentally virtuous. All individuals are believed to be capable of high moral development, and of reform.
Nelson Mandela’s achievements was the product of a combination of Gandhi 's ideas and human rights.
Humanism believes in the freedom of individual and in the appropriate application of law and order to ensure that freedom. The way Iqbal is arrested after showing a blank yellow paper, raises the issue of individual freedom. Iqbal is never a criminal but is arrested without any solid ground. He is heckled, insulted and is not given the scope to establish his view. His dignity is dashed to dust by the two constables who handcuff Iqbal’s two hands. The police arrest Iqbal for what reasons, they did not know. Iqbal wondered how the fundamental rights of the common innocent people are used to be suppressed by the police in the name of law. Iqbal strongly protested against such injustice, “…I am not a thief or a decoit. I am a political worker. I will go through the village as I am so that people can see what the police do to people they do not like” (58;
Every day, people are denied basic necessary human rights. One well known event that striped millions of these rights was the Holocaust, recounted in Elie Wiesel’s memoir, Night. As a result of the atrocities that occur all around the world, organizations have published declarations such as the United Nation’s Declaration of Human Rights. It is vital that the entitlement to all rights and freedoms without distinction of any kind, freedom of thought and religion, and the right to a standard of living adequate for health and well-being of themselves be guaranteed to everyone, as these three rights are crucial to the survival of all people and their identity.
“Human rights are not worthy of the name if they do not protect the people we don’t like as those we do”, said Trevor Phillips, a British writer, broadcaster and former politician. Since the day of human civilization and human rights are found. No one can argue against the idea that God created us equal, but this idea have been well understood and known after the appearance of many associations that fight for human rights as The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) that showed up in 1948. Human rights are those rights that every person, without exceptions, is born with. They are the most important human basic needs because no one can live a decent appropriate life without having those rights as a human. In fact, these rights
We should be only concerned with the advancement of our own moral code and follow the judicial code only if it so conveniently aligns. Ironically, the most fundamental principle to a free society is the very freedom to imprison ourselves if we so see it fit. This, specifically in the last century, has been the catalyst for great reform throughout the entire world, most effectively being the resistance to western colonialism: Britain’s India, France’s Vietnam, Britain’s Egypt, and only 150 years prior, Britain’s America. While constricting western colonialism, Gandhi's principles of ahimsa and satyagraha (respectively, strict nonviolence and adherence to one’s inner-truth), spread to America and spurred/strengthened Martin Luther King Jr.’s Civil Rights movement, and social philosopher Richard Gregg’s thoughts on nonviolence, illustrated in Gregg’s The Power of
The idea of human rights has arguably been the most debated and controversial subject in history. Who gets them, what do they consist of, and how do we enforce such a subjective idea? Answers to these questions have been given tested by the greatest leaders and brightest philosophers, yet in modern times parts of society still contests what constitutes as a human right and who gets them. The six primary documents we read this past week allowed us an insight into how the idea of human rights has been discussed throughout time.
One of the main reasons why human rights have been put in place is to protect the public life and public space of every individual being. One fundamental characteristic of human rights is that they are equal rights; they are aimed at providing protection to every person in an equal way. These rights have been entrenched through laws that are passed by states and international conventions. Human rights laws have evolved over time, and have been shaped by several factors, including philosophical theories in the past. This paper looks at the theories of two philosophers, Emmanuel Kant and John Stuart Mills, and how their teachings can be used to explain the sources of human rights. Kant’s moral philosophy is very direct in its justification of human rights, especially the ideals of moral autonomy and equality as applied to rational human beings. John Stuart Mills’ theory of utilitarianism also forms a solid basis for human rights, especially his belief that utility is the supreme criterion for judging morality, with justice being subordinate to it. The paper looks at how the two philosophers qualify their teachings as the origins of human rights, and comes to the conclusion that the moral philosophy of Kant is better than that of Mills.
Try living in a society where starving children lay on the streets looking for food, or where lack of education leads you nowhere. However, a man with knowledge and wealth helped his people fight for their rights. Gandhi’s background made him who he was; giving him an idea of how to get India’s independence, and impact on India helped people realized you can fight with knowledge and nonviolence to change a way of life.
Some claim cultural feasibility of universal human rights from a perspective of the Enlightenment. Another request a universality of human rights in a cross-cultural approach. The former may not appreciate the results of a struggle for freedom in different cultures, rather promote a sole value for their culture. It arises a criticism of cultural imperialism. Although the latter mentions cross-cultural and multicultural approach, it is still staying at the level of a proposal. How to build an intercultural understanding of universal human rights without giving the universality up is still a challenge to construct human rights culture and fulfillment in different cultural tradition. (Chen 2010; An-Naim
Mohandas “Mahatma” Gandhi (October 2, 1869 - January 30, 1948) was an Indian political leader. Since Before Gandhi was born India had been colonized by the British. During his childhood, he had witnessed the cruelty that the British had imposed on his people. However he could not do anything, then because as a member of the ruling class of India he was required to attend university in Britain where he was taught law. Once he had returned in 1914 Gandhi made it his goal to end British rule in India. There had been many attempts for self-rule in India before, however Gandhi had a...
The doctrine of human rights were created to protect every single human regardless of race, gender, sex, nationality, sexual orientation and other differences. It is based on human dignity and the belief that no one has the right to take this away from another human being. The doctrine states that every ‘man’ has inalienable rights of equality, but is this true? Are human rights universal? Whether human rights are universal has been debated for decades. There have been individuals and even countries that oppose the idea that human rights are for everybody. This argument shall be investigated in this essay, by: exploring definitions and history on human rights, debating on whether it is universal while providing examples and background information while supporting my hypothesis that human rights should be based on particular cultural values and finally drawing a conclusion.