[Xmca-l] Re: Prof. Ionna Kuçuradi

[Ulvi İçil]

Though not being sure, and this is just being a guess only, I think that
the basis human rights have such an ascendency in such a situation is the
universal character of human rights, e.g. the right to life, to thought and
so on , whereas cultural rights , as Prof. Kuçuradi puts it,  may not be
universal.

But please indicate if my reasoning is inadequate, I would like to know it
if it is a  mistaken or insufficient reasoning.

 On the other hand, human rights themselves can be in contradiction with
each other, e.g. right to property is a human right but what about when
this right opens the way to slavery, to force a person to work or to
capitalist exploitation? Then, I think that, even human rights as such may
not be adequate to provide a basis for ethical social relationships and
they should be conceived in the context of a social, historical development
of human society.

Ulvi



2013/10/18 Carol Macdonald <carolmacdon@gmail.com>

>  From Carol, in a brave attempt to confess ignorance.
>
> This is  all really very important, and we can see the negative effects of
>  the (re-)emergence right-wing Christianity being  also in conflict with
> these rights. What I need help with here, is the extraction of human rights
> in this debate.  Where do we draw these human rights from, from where are
> they deduced? What is their discourse?  I would like to know the basis of
> which we can determine that human rights have a moral ascendency when
> cultural rights are at odds with them.  I also wonder where  the gap is
> between culture and religious rights? Or is this a discourse where
> religious rights are subsumed under  or nested in cultural rights? (Or
> vice-versa.)
>
> I sense this is a philosophical debate, but discussions about human rights
> surely impinge on any cultural or religious debates or even norms.
>
> You see I have many questions.  Answering even one would help me understand
> better.
>
> Thanks
>
> Carol
>
>
> On 18 October 2013 15:30, Ulvi İçil <ulvi.icil@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > For your information.
> >
> >
> >
> http://www.unesco.org/new/en/media-services/single-view/news/interview_with_ioanna_kucuradi_turkish_philosopher/
> >
> >
> >
> > *You have even said that the promotion of respect for all cultures is a
> > “trap” for human rights.*
> >
> > **The differences of cultures is a fact. But these differences should not
> > cause discrimination. I have nothing against people living as they like,
> > *so
> > long as their world views, ways of living and norms do not prevent
> > themselves and their children from developing their human potentialities.
> > The unconditional promotion of respect for all cultures as an attempt to
> > fight discrimination is well-minded but very problematic. Many cultures
> > have norms that are incompatible with human rights – take as an example
> > polygamy or blood feud. This escapes attention, probably due to the
> > importance of culture in the singular. That is a trap for human rights.
> > What we need to respect are human beings – not cultural norms. Cultural
> > norms must be evaluated. *
> >
> > *What is, for instance, your stand on the claim of schoolchildren or
> > employees to carry symbols of religious conscience?*
> >
> > **When I was a student more than 40 years ago, there were no girls
> wearing
> > a scarf in Turkey, neither in school nor in the university. *Today there
> is
> > a revival, all over the world, of world views and norms that prevent
> > people, and children in particular, from developing as human beings. This
> > revival is closely connected with the promotion of “respect for all
> > cultures”. The best way to solve this problem is through education. The
> > concept of laïcité is often misunderstood. It does not simply consist in
> > the separation of religion and the State. Laïcité is a negative principle
> > which demands that religious and cultural norms in general do not
> determine
> > the establishment of social relations and the administration of public
> > affairs. This is why laïcité is a precondition for human rights and the
> > reason why it is very important. Those who agree with the claim of
> > schoolchildren to carry religious symbols are probably not aware that
> they
> > push children to give priority to one of their various collective
> > identities, that they push them to give priority to their cultural
> identity
> > and not their human identity, and that by doing this they promote
> > discrimination.* There is a philosophical problem behind all this. The
>  > premises from which universal human rights and cultural norms are
> deduced
> > are different, and so are the ways in which they are deduced. So to
> better
> > protect human rights we need a philosophical understanding of their
> > concepts and foundations. Unfortunately, I still see it missing
> > internationally.
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Carol A  Macdonald Ph D (Edin)
> Developmental psycholinguist
> Academic, Researcher,  and Editor
> Honorary Research Fellow: Department of Linguistics, Unisa
>