To understand the problem of natural right, one must start, not from the "scientific" understanding of political things but from their "natural" understanding, i.e., from the way in which they present themselves in political life, in action, when they are our business, when we have to make decisions. This does not mean that political life necessarily knows of natural right. Natural right had to be discovered, and there was political life prior to that discovery. It means merely that political life in all its forms necessarily points toward natural right as an inevitable problem. Awareness of this problem is not older than political science but coeval with it. Hence a political life that does not know of the idea of natural is necessarily unaware of the possibility of political science and, indeed, of the possibility of science as such, just as a political life that is aware of the the possibility of sicence necessarily knows natural right as a problem.
I'll be sure to strike up the brass band the next time I get up to pee in the middle of the night then.
Not to mention that you don't think to check whether something is in the same place as it has been the last 99/100 times you looked for it.
Seriously, the majority of the time it needs to be down (all of mine, plus at least a part of yours); numbers alone should tell you that it belongs down.
This comment has been brought to you by the letter B and the number EER.
Comments
I'll be sure to strike up
I'll be sure to strike up the brass band the next time I get up to pee in the middle of the night then.
Not to mention that you don't think to check whether something is in the same place as it has been the last 99/100 times you looked for it.
Seriously, the majority of the time it needs to be down (all of mine, plus at least a part of yours); numbers alone should tell you that it belongs down.
This comment has been brought to you by the letter B and the number EER.