Bertrand Russell's Ten Commandments

[AB Editor]

Spotted on: http://www.brainpicki...gue-bertrand-russell/

"Perhaps the essence of the Liberal outlook could be summed up in a new decalogue, not intended to replace the old one but only to supplement it. The Ten Commandments that, as a teacher, I should wish to promulgate, might be set forth as follows:


1. Do not feel absolutely certain of anything.

2. Do not think it worth while to proceed by concealing evidence, for the evidence is sure to come to light.

3. Never try to discourage thinking for you are sure to succeed.

4. When you meet with opposition, even if it should be from your husband or your children, endeavor to overcome it by argument and not by authority, for a victory dependent upon authority is unreal and illusory.

5. Have no respect for the authority of others, for there are always contrary authorities to be found.

6. Do not use power to suppress opinions you think pernicious, for if you do the opinions will suppress you.

7. Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.

8. Find more pleasure in intelligent dissent than in passive agreement, for, if you value intelligence as you should, the former implies a deeper agreement than the latter.

9. Be scrupulously truthful, even if the truth is inconvenient, for it is more inconvenient when you try to conceal it.

10. Do not feel envious of the happiness of those who live in a fool’s paradise, for only a fool will think that it is happiness."

Firstly, I thought I would share these with you all, as they're quite nicely put together.

Secondly, I wondered if anyone believes they can, or do, live by these rules? Or even if it is possible.

I would suggest it isn't possible entirely. For example: often we have to rely on the authority of others as we haven't the means, capacity or time to understand everything we would need to understand. As such we have to rely on the authority of others

Your thoughts?

[vivandorron]

Ed...You know that I always rely on your authority.!!

Ron.

[tenrec]

I've got a headache now.

[jake-the-peg]

Do you not think you may be appealng to the authority of Russell's name Ed?

He must be rolling in his grave with mirth :c)

Incidently if anyone is interested in Russel I can highly recommend this:

http://www.google.co....11655379657569678671#

[ummmm]

9. Would never work.

[jake-the-peg]

Yes Ummmm especially from a man who was not exactly faithful to his wife!

Maybe we can hear the voice of experience there!

[ummmm]

Or a woman who pretended to have a headache :-)

[Davethedog]

Tell the truth in the modern world? - No job, no spouse, no friends.

Some people are happy genuinely.

[mccfluff]

god no, ive spent all day lying

[vivandorron]

With whom mccfluff. Was he interesting.:-)

Ron.

[naomi24]

Ed, as you say, we do have to rely upon the authority of others in some instances, but that doesn’t necessarily mean the opinions of that authority are set in stone for eternity, and therefore we should always keep our options open. I would say that to the best of my ability, I pretty much live by most of them – especially number 7. ;o)

[Zeuhl]

Same here.

(Quelle surprise!)

[naomi24]

Haaa! I'd never have guessed! :o)

[ludwig]

// 5. Have no respect for the authority of others, for there are always contrary authorities to be found. //

That's a bit of a daft one. 'Never be afraid to question the authority of others' would be better. The others are good though.

[naomi24]

^^Exactly.

[NOX]

I think I try to live by most of those ( somtimes to my own cost though;(, but clearly there are limits as to how far you can take the not taking any notice of authority one for a start- you have to keep within certain boundaries as defined by law or in a few cases society, and I have been know to tell the odd white lie (usually to spare others somthing nasty) but by an large those are an ethos I can (largely) live by.

[woofgang]

Where does number 1 leave the atheists?

[naomi24]

Atheism equates not to non-belief but rather to an absence of belief in any deity. However, given sufficient demonstrable evidence of the existence of such an entity or entities, atheists would accept the finding, so number 1 is appropriate.

[mibn2cweus]

A certainty based on feelings is a train wreck waiting to happen. Certainty can only be obtained by an understanding of the facts which validate that certainty. Anything else is only an illusion of certainty just as belief, based solely on feelings devoid of the facts required to validate it, is an illusion of knowledge.

Certainty comes from knowing what you know through an understanding of the means and process by which you know it. A tea pot is a tea pot in word only whose certainty comes with drinking the tea within it.

[birdie1971]

Woofgang - “Where does number 1 leave the atheists? [1. Do not feel absolutely certain of anything.]”

As others have said, atheism is the absence of belief in a deity. It is a belief in the rational. If unequivocal empirical and logical proof was forthcoming for the existence of a supreme deity, any atheist would have no alternative but to alter their stance. As such, number 1 is simply not a problem for atheists.

That being the case and more to the point, where does number 1 leave the theists?

[naomi24]

//where does number 1 leave the theists?//

Any offers?