Would you be successful in writing Ten new Commandments?
|
|
|
26-10-2012, 01:26 AM
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
The concept of commandments is that they are strict, without room for any deviation, and can't be loosely interpreted. That's why, even with reasonable ones, people don't approve of them.
But would you be able to come up with Ten new Commandments that could be relevant 5000yrs ago, and 5000yrs in the future? So, as stated, the criteria is: 1. Must be followed. 2. No room for (re?)interpretation. 3. Applicable to all time periods (past and future). 4. Written in 100 words or less, total. 5. Humanity is better off for it (or, better off as you see it) |
||||
26-10-2012, 10:51 AM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Would you be successful in writing Ten new Commandments?
(26-10-2012 01:26 AM)poolboyg88 Wrote: But would you be able to come up with Ten new Commandments that could be relevant 5000yrs ago, and 5000yrs in the future? I believe I have a more encompasing social contract, if you are not afraid to understand that the Ten Commandments is not much different than any other social agreement. Better classification of human knowledge is always relevent. Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefully ![]() |
||||
26-10-2012, 12:45 PM
(This post was last modified: 26-10-2012 02:03 PM by Aseptic Skeptic.)
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Would you be successful in writing Ten new Commandments?
Aren't the original 10 commandments much longer than 100 words?
KJV version has 381 words: Nevertheless, here's mine, only 74 words. 1. Treat others the way you want them to treat you, honorably and respectfully. 2. Do not hurt or kill people. 3. Do not lie, cheat, or steal. 4. People are not property. 5. Honor all commitments to your spouse, family, community. 6. Always seek to learn new things. 7. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. 8. Do not worship any gods. Ever. 9. Live life with a sense of joy and wonder. 10. Question everything, including these commandments. "Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein |
||||
26-10-2012, 01:10 PM
(This post was last modified: 26-10-2012 01:18 PM by TrainWreck.)
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Would you be successful in writing Ten new Commandments?
(26-10-2012 12:45 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote: Question everything, including these commandments. Classic example of atheist circular reasoning being used, as a false hypothesis or something, for critical thinking; ultimately corresponding to the theists' circular reasoning in their doctrines of social organization - so deplored by atheists. When are atheists going to finish analysing and get to establishing Truth!?!?! Let's move on to the next step in the evolution of Mankind. Oh, I forgot, we have to wait for the Christians to submit to the atheists demands in order for us to think straight. Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefully ![]() |
||||
26-10-2012, 01:13 PM
|
||||
|
||||
AW: RE: Would you be successful in writing Ten new Commandments?
(26-10-2012 01:10 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:Keep baiting, old chap.(26-10-2012 12:45 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote: Question everything, including these commandments. ![]() ![]() |
||||
26-10-2012, 02:19 PM
(This post was last modified: 26-10-2012 11:06 PM by Aseptic Skeptic.)
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Would you be successful in writing Ten new Commandments?
I'll take the bait.
(26-10-2012 01:10 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:(26-10-2012 12:45 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote: Question everything, including these commandments. I don't understand what you're saying. Would you please troll me with greater lucidity or at least with less methamphetamine? I used no circular reasoning for there was no reasoning. Just a "commandment" to question everything including the "commandment" itself. That's not even circular. It just says that we should take nothing for granted and we should be prepared to understand why we do everything while at the same time allowing for the fact that even this suggestion should be examined and not taken for granted - it might not apply to everyone, and nobody will know if it's right for them without examining and questioning it first. It was also not a hypothesis, false or otherwise. Any chance you just used this word because it's big and impressive, but you really don't know what it means? I don't even agree that theists have circular reasoning in their social doctrines - their circular reasoning mostly comes from believing in god because the bible says so, and believing the bible because god created it. Two really different things entirely. (26-10-2012 01:10 PM)TrainWreck Wrote: When are atheists going to finish analysing and get to establishing Truth!?!?! Is that our job? Do you have any idea what "atheism" means? I can't even find one dictionary that includes "establisher of Truth" in the definition. Truth is self-defining. If something is true, then it is just true. It doesn't need to be established as true. Water is wet. Water does not need your nor I to establish the fact that it's wet. It just is. I'll grant that if someone disagrees, then maybe someone else might want to throw some facts around to convince the person who disagrees, and that might be providing evidence of the truth, but it's still not establishing truth (with or without your capital-T). (26-10-2012 01:10 PM)TrainWreck Wrote: Let's move on to the next step in the evolution of Mankind. Working on it. So are you (though I'm inclined, thus far, to believe just might be farther along the evolutionary path than you). We're going to evolve with or without either of us, so what's your point? (26-10-2012 01:10 PM)TrainWreck Wrote: Oh, I forgot, we have to wait for the Christians to submit to the atheists demands in order for us to think straight. Finally we agree - as a society we would think much straighter if Christians began thinking like atheists. That is what you meant, right? Otherwise, I guess I might have missed your point about submitting to atheists' demands - do we have a manifesto that I've overlooked? Can you link it for me? I'd sure love to learn what my demands are. Or maybe you're just misinformed, clueless, and have no idea what atheism really is. But thanks for playing. "Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein |
||||
![]() |
26-10-2012, 02:42 PM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Would you be successful in writing Ten new Commandments?
Fuck commandments.
![]() Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims. Science is not a subject, but a method. ![]() |
||||
![]() |
26-10-2012, 02:43 PM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Would you be successful in writing Ten new Commandments?
(26-10-2012 01:10 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:(26-10-2012 12:45 PM)Aseptic Skeptic Wrote: Question everything, including these commandments. "Truth" ? 1. How would you know it if you saw it ? 2. How exactly did you perceive it ? 3. How did you decide what that is ? 4. What was the standard you used to determine it was the "truth" ? If there was a standard, it ain't THE truth. Insufferable know-it-all. ![]() |
||||
![]() |
26-10-2012, 02:51 PM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Would you be successful in writing Ten new Commandments?
Girly likes recursion, it's more powerful than iteration.
12 words. 1. Don't be an asshole. 2. Unless it's called for. 3. See Commandment number 1. #sigh |
||||
26-10-2012, 03:08 PM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Would you be successful in writing Ten new Commandments?
(26-10-2012 02:42 PM)Chas Wrote: Fuck commandments. Your list is a bit short. You need 9 more commandments. "Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein |
||||
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)