Amazon.com Widgets

« An Inventory of the Invisible - John Lloyd | Main | Mixing Religion and Politics »

Links With Your Coffee - Wednesday

coffee.gif



 

Comments

The Ten Commandments:

worth looking at "The Last Dcalogue" by 19th Century poet Arthur Hugh Clough.

http://poetry.poetryx.com/poems/9772/

Ooops - 'Decalogue'- Sorry Arthur.

I was going to post this seperately and might at some point, but here is a great podcast where Hitchbitch tears into the 'Decalogue'.

One could spend a lifetime studying how stupid it is.

I guess the link might be helpful

http://lifewithoutfaith.com/?p=1593

re: israeli censorship:

this is terrible. teaching sexually explicit poetry is a time-honored jewish tradition (see "song of songs"). these modern israelis are trying to take the "jew" out of israel, to make us "a nation like other nations". a shanda. i disapprove strongly.

re: The Widdecombe witch.

Who was that comedian who said something along the lines of "yeah, up until the 10 commandments were given, all the Jews thought that it was perfectly OK to murder".

I'm thinking it might have been David Mitchell, or maybe Ricky Gervais.

sigh. there is lawful killing (for instance, in self defence) and unlawful killing. unlawful killing is called murder.

i couldn't begin to count the unbelievably stupid things i've seen otherwise intelligent people say about this issue here.

for the mathematically inclined: murder is a SUBSET of killing. it's the same in english as it is in hebrew, i really don't understand people's inability to grasp the concept.

So you're saying murder is killing, but killing is not murder. What's that got to do with the point made?

Murder or killing, whichever, was it OK before the 10 commandments?

some forms of killing were "ok" before the 10 commandments and after as well. the torah actually sets out legal guidlines for acceptable killing. you may not like them- fine, neither did we. but the need for a framework until there is no longer a need to make a distinction between "murder" and "killing" remains regardless of whether some society manages to stamp out religion. modern enlightened society has legislated out many forms of "legal killing", but many remain, such as war and self-defence. and many of the old reasons have been replaced by new ones not legislated by the bible- euthanasia and, if you want to go there, late-term abortions and killing as punishment for particularly brutal crimes (death penalty). (the bible doesn't take brutality into account- murder is murder.)

please continue in your hopey-changy way :) to try to limit legalized forms of killing but in the meantime, every society in the world has some form or forms of it.

(i can't stand palin but i loved that "hopey-changey" thing. i bet she didn't come up with that herself, it's too good. i've been dying to use it. sorry you were the guinea pig. :))

i'm sorry, i know i've been really long winded and posting too much lately. been home sick.

I'm not sure what's your point. The point of what I quoted is simple. Did the 10 commandments (or any other religious law) make it bad to kill, or steal. Of course not.

Couldn't the people have figured out those things before those god published his work? Of course they could have.

Do you think they couldn't? It's a very simple argument with a very simple answer, I don't know how you manage to mangle all this.

boy, you really got a lotta faith in human nature. now that's what i call belief!

It's called evolution, and it doesn't require belief. Even other animals exhibit empathy, especially those closer cousins of ours. When they see close members of their family or even species, they also suffer.

if you think the 10 commandments- or the other 603- have anything to do with "empathy" you're out of your mind. re: this particular issue:

when someone needs to be killed, the people who need to do the killing aren't going to be swayed by "empathy".

Not all the 10 (or 13435) commandments, just the couple moral ones.

And just because some people are assholes enough to kill like savages, doesn't mean that empathy and a general dislike of killing your own didn't evolve.

Some people don't like to have sex or even hate it. Does it mean sex drive is not an evolutionary adaptation?

BTW just in case if it wasn't clear enough. On the second question, "could the people have figured out killing and stealing are wrong?" The answer is not just "of course they could have", but furthermore, "of course they already knew".

Or, do you think literally god delivered the tablets to Mo?

If so, I wasn't aware that you were a literal god-believer, just fucking with us with philosophical meanderings.

So you're saying murder is killing, but killing is not murder. What's that got to do with the point made?

the point made, i understand, is that people probably had some kind of aversion to killing before the 10 commandments. the point i'm making is that not only is that not so, but it still isn't so. the evidence is over-fucking wheming and i can't believe you don't see it. are you suggesting that "thou shalt not murder" wouldn't be on YOUR top ten list?

Again, that some like killing doesn't mean there's no general aversion to it. Would you go killing if it wasn't for your god's commandments? Even most people I know who are religious don't think so.

And most people who kill kill because there's something worthwhile (to them) to gain. Be it tribalism or be it money and power. If there's nothing to gain, most won't kill unless they're deranged sociopaths.

Would you go killing if it wasn't for your god's commandments?

please don't make me answer that in public, boss.

So you're saying murder is killing, but killing is not murder.

that's not at all what i'm saying. again, killing is sometimes murder,sometimes not- it depends on the legal framework, which the bible conveniently provides. we in turn can completely ignore and/or amend it if we choose. in the jewish view if we fuck up the mix by not being straight with our father in heaven we will suffer hell on earth. in the christian view we will suffer hell...somewhere else. what's the dif? here's the blueprint now get busy, ya bastards. :)

I should have said "killing is not always murder", you're right.

if you get tired of my yadda yadda just don't ask me questions, because i WILL answer them.

some people are assholes enough to kill like savages

only "some"? i guess you didn't really grasp the implications of that millgram experiment. or any of the other "experiments" involving human willingness to "kill like savages" going on around the world. we call them "wars", in order to compartmentalize and engage our cognitave dissonance, but make no mistake: even you, mah brotha, are only one step away from "killing like a savage". word.

  1. You completely missed the second paragraph of my reply above. People don't kill for free.

  2. EVEN counting all the wars. Do you think the majority of people are killers, and don't mind being killers? All the Homo sapiens who have killed in all the H. sapiens wars, are majority against all H. sapiens* who haven't killed?

I'm just curious if that's what you think.

PTSD would argue that we are not designed to kill one another.

I hardy imagine lions wake up screaming at night, years after killing another lion.

you sound like a theologian. :)

ptsd isn't usually a result of "guilt" or "empathy". when it is they usually make a movie about it. secretly funded by some church organization.

in any case i would say conscience is software, not hardware.

Who do you suppose installed the software?

um, social engineering? i had my paranoia installed back when it still had real leather seats. :)

i didn't miss your second paragraph. there are a lot of implied questions in your thoughtful posts, sometimes i don't get to them all. i ain't getting paid for this. :) there's your answer: people WILL do all kinds of things "for free".

let me lay it out for you: there are plenty of people i've only heard about that i would kill with relish, and torture them too, if presented the chance and if- heres the important part- i weren't restrained by (let's call it) social convention. i would do it only to see justice done, and for the satisfaction of "weeding the garden". i might also do it say, for revenge, if someone were to hurt my loved ones. hell, people kill other people all the time not only for no material gain, but when they know they're going to suffer and maybe die for it!

still, i won't do this. if you think biological evolution has something to do with whatever is restraining me, i'd like to see your theory. i can see that evolution predisposes me to be concerned about what my fellow man thinks, but other than that, i don't see it. evolution has made me a killer. mankind has made me a pussycat.

I think you're reading too much into what I ask. I've learned to ask you only direct clear questions ;)

Anyway, evolution made mankind, as well as all the other animals.

Navigation

Support this site

Google Ads


Powered by Movable Type Pro

Copyright © 2002-2017 Norman Jenson

Contact


Commenting Policy

note: non-authenticated comments are moderated, you can avoid the delay by registering.

Random Quotation

Individual Archives

Monthly Archives