So, the sultan of Brunei has decided to implement laws that require those found guilty of adultery or homosexual acts to be stoned to death.
Let's take this gradually:
Q1) Should people be sanctioned for who they are or whoever they love?
Q2) Should that sanction involve the death penalty?
Q3) Should that death penalty be implemented in such a medieval, barbaric fashion?
Q4) Should the west continue to trade with Brunei, whilst such policies are enforced by the state?
Q5) Or are our western values to be purchased at the price of merely this profitable trade deal, or that?
Best wishes, 2RM.
Principle vs Expediency
Moderator: Moderators
- 2ndRateMind
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 1540
- Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:25 am
- Location: Pilgrim on another way
- Has thanked: 65 times
- Been thanked: 68 times
Re: Principle vs Expediency
Post #22ndRateMind wrote: So, the sultan of Brunei has decided to implement laws that require those found guilty of adultery or homosexual acts to be stoned to death.
The question is, should people take the Koran or the Bible literally? Should they accept in modern times recommendations that might have suited a barbaric, nomadic society?
The Sultan was simply accepting what his religion taught and acting accordingly. The alternative is to say that Bible and Koran are sometimes wrong in what they advocate.
Perhaps the safest way is to read the Bible or Koran as we read works of fiction, with due admiration for the occasional fine phrase.
In any event world pressure seems to have induced the Sultan to reconsider.
Re: Principle vs Expediency
Post #32ndRateMind wrote: So, the sultan of Brunei has decided to implement laws that require those found guilty of adultery or homosexual acts to be stoned to death.
The question is, should people take the Koran or the Bible literally? Should they accept in modern times recommendations that might have suited a barbaric, nomadic society?
The Sultan was simply accepting what his religion taught and acting accordingly. The alternative is to say that Bible and Koran are sometimes wrong in what they advocate.
Perhaps the safest way is to read the Bible or Koran as we read works of fiction, with due admiration for the occasional fine phrase.
In any event world pressure seems to have induced the Sultan to reconsider.
- 2ndRateMind
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 1540
- Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:25 am
- Location: Pilgrim on another way
- Has thanked: 65 times
- Been thanked: 68 times
Re: Principle vs Expediency
Post #4Perhaps we should. But even a work of fiction has to have some elements of reality about it, or we could not relate to it at all. So, for example, fiction might be set in the present time, in the real world, with fictional characters (ordinary fiction). Or in some future time, in an imagined world, with fictional characters (science fiction). Or in some past time, (historical fiction) etc. Or in some imaginary world, (fantasy fiction) etc. Whatever the setting, the common 'truth' is human psychology, without which nothing makes sense. And so the purpose, even of fiction, is very much to portray truth.marco wrote:Perhaps the safest way is to read the Bible or Koran as we read works of fiction, with due admiration for the occasional fine phrase.2ndRateMind wrote: So, the sultan of Brunei has decided to implement laws that require those found guilty of adultery or homosexual acts to be stoned to death.
Best wishes, 2RM.
Non omnes qui errant pereunt
Not all who wander are lost
Not all who wander are lost
Re: Principle vs Expediency
Post #5The purpose of fiction is to entertain, by whatever means. That often involves absurdity that makes us laugh. If there is truth then it is incidental truth, not the raison d'être of the work. I accept that there is truth to be found in Harry Potter, but I think JK Rowling was keen to capture a child's imagination, which she did most successfully and cleverly, rather than propagate truth.
In my copy of the standard English grammar at school there was a fascinating list of proverbs, all receptacles of truth but the purpose of the book was to instruct in English syntax. We can read the Bible and applaud young David's daring, just as we applaud Harry in his fight against Lord Voldemort. Our mistake would be in supposing the Bible has God's stamp of approval. We can then disapprove of what we find silly.
- 2ndRateMind
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 1540
- Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:25 am
- Location: Pilgrim on another way
- Has thanked: 65 times
- Been thanked: 68 times
Re: Principle vs Expediency
Post #6Uh huh. But the characters, however fictional, must be believable in order to achieve the aim of entertainment. And a lot of that entertainment is derived from putting those believable characters into extreme circumstances, to see how they react. Fiction need not be fact, to be true to life.marco wrote:The purpose of fiction is to entertain, by whatever means. That often involves absurdity that makes us laugh. If there is truth then it is incidental truth, not the raison d'être of the work.
Best wishes, 2RM.
Non omnes qui errant pereunt
Not all who wander are lost
Not all who wander are lost
-
- Apprentice
- Posts: 121
- Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2018 1:35 pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #7
Im gonna go with multiple handfuls of no, a large order of you got to be kidding me and supersize me a glass of get the fudge out of here.
Sad stuff. Evidence that man is superior only in thier ability to be stupid, evil, fearful hate driven monkey's.
Sad stuff. Evidence that man is superior only in thier ability to be stupid, evil, fearful hate driven monkey's.