critical thinking posts
Thanks to the many people who made the first critical thinking forum successful.
Post ideas for future forums and activities you would like to see for faculty and staff.
posted by lenig @ 2:32 PM
2 comments
2 Comments:
A blog is a great idea for exchanging views and resources as these come to us.
It can be enhanced by making it a team blog.
Ask for volunteers by email. Then send them invitations thru Blogger. They can set their own username and password and are enabled to create regular postings with pictures etc. You can still retain control as administator to disinvite anyone you want. It would work well for committee members. But it would also allow others who don't have time for the committee to contribute to everyone's thinking.
Blogs tend to disappear fom sight. So general emails anouncing new postings or to remind people to check out what's available can make it more useful
With regards to the Lewis Vaughn article posted on the critical thinking website, Protect my children from the Ten Commandments.
I hope you are looking for posts like this. The article certainly gave cause to some critical thinking.
The argument of posting The Ten Commandments on the wall causing conflict is probably valid. Each of us has free will and can choose our beliefs and doctrines as we see fit. I am simply not agreeing with the dissections and justifications presented by the author, Vaughn, in this article. I think we must consider the division between those that choose to practice religion or faith and those that do not and the level of inerrancy they hold the Bible to. Some consider the Bible to merely be a historical document. Regardless of the position you take, it would be hard to deny that the Bible was written based on faith. The Ten Commandments as a stand alone document merely serve to remind those of faith of the Biblical writings. I believe you have to have some knowledge of the Bible and its teachings to understand the Ten Commandments.
Vaughn begins his dissection by stating that the Ten Commandments “conflict with one another.” I understand the conflict through the example killing in self-defense. However, I would say that not doing these acts is probably a better way to go about life. God himself has asked people to kill, directing the Isrealites to destroy entire nations. Some might explain this as the end justifying the means as God’s direction served to purify the Isrealites. The killing of Jesus Christ was allowed to happen in order to cleanse the world. So there is record of God asking for, or allowing, people to be killed. I get the “what if” statements but the bottom line is God did not command that we should “go forth and murder, rape our neighbors, and rob our friends.” There is no denying that thou shall not kill is a pretty good rule to follow.
Vaughn supports the statement that “They are absolutist to the point of being immoral” with a similar example, the act of stealing food to feed your hungry children. The justification for this act is man-made. Stealing is not moral in any sense. Society in general, myself included, would accept stealing food to feed your children as a reasonable defense. However, society in general, including myself, would also label this act as immoral, unethical and illegal. The means may justify the ends but that does not change the core meaning of taking something that does not belong to you.
Arguing “divine authority” is subjective. The thought that if God had commanded “that we go forth and murder, rape our neighbors, and rob our friends” would label these actions as right by God’s condoning is as foolish as citing in comparison “moronic hikers who walk off a cliff because they were told to stay the course.” This example fails to mention the given source, God, which is extremely relevant. Divine authority could certainly be granted to God, as long as you are a believer. The only absence of divine authority in the Ten Commandments would be raised by those that accept God has no authority. Divine as a word is from the Latin divinus, from divus God. So to say that The Ten Commandments have no “divine authority” is simply an ignorance of the meaning and origin of the word divine.
I have rambled too much already and I am sure there are those whose critical thinking skills surpass mine and far more biblical knowledge than I possess, they could counter my thoughts with fervor. But I would be remiss if I did not mention that statement “there are several versions” of The Ten Commandments. There are three – Exodus 20, Exodus 34 and Deuteronomy 5. Exodus 20 is the most commonly used set and the Protestant version is the most widely displayed. Different faiths might prefer one version over another but that does not change the fact that each version is of a different author who is describing a single event, God giving The Ten Commandments to the Isrealites. Each author described the event from their own perspective in time and to promote their religious beliefs. This does not change the fact that all three versions are remarkably synonymous and differ primarily in describing the reasons for observing the Sabbath.
The Ten Commandments should be considered as they are presented, in a body of work, the Bible. It is not fair to read more into the Ten Commandments than what is there. I know, I know, life is not fair…
Post a Comment
<< Home