Dear Tom,
It was not the "structuration" and the means to it that I have tried to
pose. But nevertheless I found your insightful comments very valuable. I
will think about them.
However, the main point is that: How is it possible to envisage/ think
about INALIENABLE and NON-TRANSCENDENTAL conception of HUMAN RIGHTS. The
hearth of the sentence is beating at caps lock. words, not at the
verb per se.
I do not have a clear answer, or let me call it a cogent preliminary
approach to the problem. I am still thinking at the moment. I will not
hesitate to write if i can find sth. valuable.
Koray Caliskan
Bosphorus University, Istanbul
Dept. of Political Science (RA)
It was not the "structuration" and the means to it that I have tried to
pose. But nevertheless I found your insightful comments very valuable. I
will think about them.
However, the main point is that: How is it possible to envisage/ think
about INALIENABLE and NON-TRANSCENDENTAL conception of HUMAN RIGHTS. The
hearth of the sentence is beating at caps lock. words, not at the
verb per se.
I do not have a clear answer, or let me call it a cogent preliminary
approach to the problem. I am still thinking at the moment. I will not
hesitate to write if i can find sth. valuable.
Koray Caliskan
Bosphorus University, Istanbul
Dept. of Political Science (RA)