Irrespective of the fact that nature does not have an occult...

Irrespective of the fact that nature does not have an occult existence and especially because it cannot be proved that society has a nature, two other problems become evident: Firstly, as pointed out the credence of right is correct for a thing or person only in case which necessitates the specification of duty for a person having a free will in that case.

For instance, credence to the right of use of water, air and light for a tree is appropriate if it binds a man to observe this right and not to create hindrance in its usage. Any one who gives the right to a thing or person in fact provides a duty for the one who has free will to observe that right. Now the question is as to what authority has the trees nature on a man so as to fix such a duty for him? And reciprocally binds man to obey the order or the trees nature?

Secondly, when something causes clash between two beings, each of which want to exploit it, how can their right and duty be fixed? For example, if the life health or growth of man depends on drinking the water which an animal wants to drink, in that case will the right of man have preference or that of the animal? Who would specify such a right?

In reply to such a problem it can be said that universal nature which is the creator of all minor natures of man, animal and other creatures has bestowed greater right to the mightier and, therefore, mans right has a preference on animal rights. Although it is a fact that the existence of the overall nature is not stable for the world the standard of right, at least in case of clash, in nothing but power and strength.

Naturally, if the clash is between beings, the stronger man will have greater rights, this is the basis of the law of jungle and not the basis of human morality and laws. (2) The other instance is that right and duty is fixed on the basis of their objectives. For instance, a tree moves to attain its particular objective which is the final stage of its grow. It should, therefore, exploit the means to achieve its ultimate goal. So is the ultimate object of mans move for perfection.

It is this which decides its rights. As far as the clashes between human being are concerned, rights and duties should be so specified that the largest number of members of a society achieve those highest objectives.