I believe in maximizing the amount of resources I can from people, and therefore feeling I deserve what I plausibly can get—but I don’t see how that’s a “right”. I think what you realized is that you didn’t have to deal with ciriticism, teasing, harassment, not that you had the right to not deal with those things.
I’m using “right” in the sense that a programmer speaks of “access rights”. An access right is the ability to do something, not moral approval. Rights in the sense I’m speaking of here simply refers to making a set of actions reachable in the brain’s planning trees, if that makes sense.
I’ve found, though, that asserting that one has the right to do something is helpful in imperatively making this connection in the brain, so that’s the word I use. (It seems in many people to elicit an accompanying “territorial” emotional response, that may or may not be related to the mechanism used to mark actions accessible or inaccessible in the first place.)
I believe in maximizing the amount of resources I can from people, and therefore feeling I deserve what I plausibly can get—but I don’t see how that’s a “right”. I think what you realized is that you didn’t have to deal with ciriticism, teasing, harassment, not that you had the right to not deal with those things.
I’m using “right” in the sense that a programmer speaks of “access rights”. An access right is the ability to do something, not moral approval. Rights in the sense I’m speaking of here simply refers to making a set of actions reachable in the brain’s planning trees, if that makes sense.
I’ve found, though, that asserting that one has the right to do something is helpful in imperatively making this connection in the brain, so that’s the word I use. (It seems in many people to elicit an accompanying “territorial” emotional response, that may or may not be related to the mechanism used to mark actions accessible or inaccessible in the first place.)