D.

Balancing Equities: Dealing with Terrorism and Upholding Human Rights: A Philosophical-
Juridical Perspective Why Equities Need to be Balanced

1. The End does not Justify the means- this asserts that it is not possible to do good by doing
something that is inherently wrong. Each action done must be measured independently, good or
bad, or otherwise people will justify their bad actions based on the good they have done.

For example: Robin Hood, he is stealing from the wealth of the rich people and then giving
some money or helping poor. The act of giving or helping other people is good, but the act of
stealing is bad. Though he helped others it does not cure the defect.

According to the book, the more horrifying the assault is the stronger the temptation to
counterattack.

Terrorists attacks lately have increasingly violent. Just like the ISIS group, siguro..weve watched
naman in news that their acts is so cruel and violent. Despite the negotiations against
preemptive strikes, to many governments, it is a matter of getting the first before they get you
Yun bang unahan mo na, bago sila pa mauna. However, this act is unreasonable. But after
the bloody war some of the relatives civilian or even the relatives of military personnel would
ask the government , why did they not strike first before the terrorist do so since they knew in
the future that the terrorist would strike them?


2. The campaign for human rights then cannot, and should not result in heinous act of the
government and the state to respond in terrorism. Many of the military personnel and civilians
are affected in the cruelty acted upon by the terrorist, land mines everywhere, bombs in malls,
throwing grenades in public places. They are very creative in doing their acts. They are willing to
do these acts to many number of human around them. But in difficult situation that occurs by
chance, we must find our composure coz we are ought to be respond reasonably and humanly.
If the State itself terrorizes by disregarding the human rights in dealing the terrorists, it loses the
moral influence with which pursue them, interdict them and hold them accountable. A state
that abides by the due process of law and respects inalienable rights and liberties constitute a
moral position and grants it that height that enables it to be the enforcer of the Law.

3. Siguro we observed naman in the news , some of us commenting pa nga na if there are some
terrorist like NPAs that have been caught and stand in trial and invoke their rights guaranteed
by them by the Constitution we find it very ironic, di ba? Sila na nga yung unang nagva-violate
ng karapatang pantao yet they are the one who have a lot of nerve to adduce such rights. We
find it very shameful, mainis-inis pa nga tayo minsan di ba? But ofcourse we who are tasked to
meting out punishment should not deny their equal-protection of the law.

Another look at Human Rights: A philosophy of Human Rights
Paul Ricoeur was among the most impressive philosophers of the 20th century. He also served in World
War II spending most of it as a prisoner of war. His is a reflective philosophy, that is, one that considers
the most fundamental philosophical problems to concern self-understanding.
4. Paul Ricoeur, in who is the Subject of human rights? advances the juridical question: who is
the subject of rights? and it is a moral question: who is subject worthy of esteem and
respect?, which is likewise the question of the person who studied humans as: what are the
fundamental features that make self capable esteem and respect? Who that is, as a person
who is the subject of a concrete situation, a situation characterized by material and phenomenal
qualities. This entails understanding oneself as a named person with a time and place of birth,
linked to other similarly named persons and to certain ethnic and cultural traditions, living in a
dated and named place. The human agent is capable of designating himself as the author of his
or her acts. Like I planted the bomb. I set it off

5. Narrative Identity
This is the historical present is the time of actions, the time of the inaugurations of new
sequences and arrangements of things. It is also the moment framed by the agent's space of
experience and horizon of expectation. To give expression to this complex historical present one
must use a kind of discourse that can articulate both strings of actions and events and their
human contexts. The kind of discourse that can do this is narrative. Thus historical time becomes
human time to the extent that it is articulated through a narrative mode, and narrative attains
its full significance when it becomes a condition of temporal existence.
Events in our lives are not pre-determined rather those in our history as a people. Every human
is constituted identified by a series of future event.
Ricoeur's analysis of personal narrative identity yields four conclusions that are basic to his
anthropology. They are:
1. Because my personal identity is a narrative identity, I can make sense of myself only in
and through my involvement with others.
2. In my dealings with others, I do not simply enact a role or function that has been
assigned to me. I can change myself through my own efforts and can reasonably
encourage others to change as well.
3. Nonetheless, because I am an embodied existence and hence have inherited both
biological and psychological constraints, I cannot change everything about myself. And
because others are similarly constrained, I cannot sensibly call for comprehensive
changes in them.
4. Though I can be evaluated in a number of ways, e.g., physical dexterity, verbal fluency,
technical skill, the ethical evaluation in the light of my responsiveness to others, over
time, is, on the whole, the most important evaluation.
In sum, a narrative about human persons tells of both the connections that unify multiple
actions over a span of time performed, in most cases, by a multiplicity of persons and the
connections that link multiple viewpoints on and assessments of those actions. The narrative
constructs the identity of the character, what can be called his or her narrative identity, in
constructing that of the story told. It is the identity of the story that makes the identity of the
character.
The concrete result is that no one is pre-determined superior, inferior, godly, pure nor impure