"Thou shalt not kill."
"Thou shalt not commit adultery."
"Thou shalt not steal."
"Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor."
Nothing in history has robbed, killed, deprived, suppressed -- the fundamental nature of man -- more than the great "Thou Shalt Not".
13 comments:
Your Sinfulness,
Nothing in history has allowed man to grow, flourish, develop rational skills, complex differentiation in society, as well as art, science, philosophy and, in general, transcend his bestial origins and appoach the "divine" like the "Thou shalt not."
Without it, men would be still living in the state of nature where, as Hobbes so eloquently put it, life is brutish, nasty and short.
The loyal opposition, suffering patiently, waiting for the advent of the Lord Huang Lao,--- when the blue sky will perish and the yellow sky will begin.
Nicolas Eymeric
SSPA
<3333333333 :D just cause i know it makes u happy im commentign your thingy again. um i think ive done all those thhings that it says i shouldnt do. except i dont know what the neighbor one means lol. i didnt kill a person ive kille dother things though. BY MISTAKE I PROMISE. WITH MUCHO LOVE AFSOOOOOOOOON!
Nicolas,
I couldn't disagree more. The pinnacle of western civilization -- that being both Greek and Roman -- did not possess these great "Thou Shalt Not" commandments; they flourished in both reason and science. Life in nature can be "nasty, brutish, and short", but it can also be beautiful and enjoy longevity.
Behold! The great "Thou Shalt Not" commands have ceased to be a burden upon mankind -- and science has advanced further in the past 100 years than it ever did while being subjected to the ridiculous laws of God.
Your Sinfulness,
Contra factum non valet argumentum. We must disagree with your assertions. Both Greek and Roman societies were full of "Thou shalt nots." The fastum and nefastum of the Romans, the meticulous attention to detail in performing the Sacred rites. A Vestal who broke her vows could be buried alive. The Romans had religious festivals all year, and were very pious about the gods. In fact, they were down right superstitious in their attention to omens! The "twelve tables" promulgated at the very beginings of the Roman Republic (450's BC) were more than half concerned with religious topics and rules.
The Greeks too had many "Thou shalt nots", including prohibitions against murder, patricide, and desecration of religious sites (eg. Alkibiades and the Herms) We point out,-- in passing,-- that theater, including musical theater, began as part of a Greek religious festival, as did the Olympics.The Greeks as "supreme rationalists", in the 18th century philosophe style, was always an Enlightenment myth.
In conclusion, even 17th century scientific method has roots in late medieval scholastic philosophy, Occam, and in alchemy.
I am afraid that all previous cultures and civilations were suffused and founded by the "numinous." Gods and their "Thou shalt nots" is the root of human advance. Keep up the struggle, though it is doomed to failure in the end.
N
And the world evolved into the monotheistic view of God -- behold -- we evolve once more. Now we need no such God, no such "Thou Shall Not" to bind us.
You didn't address the issue of scientific advancement. One is hard-pressed to claim that since science is at the forefront of mankind -- as opposed to God -- that science has not made tremendous strides. In the past 100 years science has arguably accomplished more than "God" has in the past 2000 years.
Your sinfulness,
You make a false distinction between God and science. In fact most of the great scientific pioneers of the 17th, 18th, and even 19th century believed in some notion of God. Einsein, Schweitzer. Secondly, you speak as if scientific method had no genealogy. It arose out of a fundamental faith in the orderliness of the universe and in its openness to reason and human research. Alchemist all had some notion of an "anima mundi" or Mind behind the multiplicity of naure.
Modern science has been guiltly of some bizarre improvements for mankind. The atom bomb, vivisection, toxic chemicals, human experimentation, frontal lobotomies,
etc. Science unbounded by "Thou shalt nots" can become a real monster.
No more monstrous than religion can be. I'll address this more tomorrow, I'm rather tired.
Now, whether or not those scientist believed in a higher power is irrelevant. To attribute their scientific breakthroughs to their belief is silly, and brings us back to the famous, "Goddidit" routine theists tend to fall back on.
Your Sinfulness,
Your primary argument was that the "Thou shalts" had somehow inhibited man's progress. We counter that these "Thou shalts", buttressed by the divine sanction, slowly tamed and civilized man, allowing for higher culture to develop. Even agnostic Pre-Socratic sophists concede this point.
How could primitive cultures have advanced, developed divison of labor, complex social relations, etc. which permitted scientifc culture to arise without prohibitions? Where would we be if men were permitted to murder rape steal and commit mayhem with impunity, with no internal inhibition? Oh, we know, downtown Trenton, 2208!
Nicolas Eymeric
That wasn't my argument at all. My argument was that the great "Thou Shalt Not" infringed on the fundamental nature of man -- not his progression. I never said that, and I'm not going to defend a position I never adhered to in the first place.
Your sinfulness,
Forgive us if we misstated your position. In any event, is it the "fundamental nature of man" to steal, lie, murder, etc? That is a bif universal judgement. If that is the case, it was in the "fundamental nature of man" never to develop into civilized man.
Nicolas
It's natural in so far as it occurred. It's no less natural than atom bombs, etc. All part of the evolutionary process. And yes, I see no natural law binding any individual human being from murdering, raping, stealing, pillaging, etc etc etc.
Not to belabor the point, but if what is "natural" is what occurs, then how could the "Thou Shalts" have impinged on "fundamental human nature?" Whatever man does and thinks at any point in time is "natural", including the idea of God, the imposition of "Thou shalts", the beliefin a "natural law" etc. You may not like them, and may find this ideas repulsive to your idiosyncratic tastes, but that is a far as you can go. this subject wearies us. Were repeating the same thing in different ways. Let us agree to disagree. A matter of personal taste.
By the way, an "enemy of truth" has penetrated your commentary list "on prayer" We initiated a counter attack, but we should advise you to check it out.
N
Post a Comment