UCTAA churchlight

Site Search via Google

Discussion 2 to Reflections on Ethics 19
You can disagree, but you cannot disprove

by: Will Petillo

To add to this exchange of views (or any other,) please use the Contact form. This discussion has been continued.

Commandments are rules that the issuer (i.e. Russell) believes people SHOULD follow. Thus, Russell makes no claim in his 1st commandment that it is impossible to be certain about something, he is only stating a belief that certainty is bad. So you breaking his commandment does not make the commandment self-contradictory.

You can argue that the commandment is not such a good one--i.e. that certainty is great! Even if you were able to make a compelling argument (which would be interesting to read), this would still not make the commandment self-contradictory.

And we could argue about whether you can truthfully say that you are certain of anything (as opposed to just making assertions). But such a discussion would be tangential to Russell's commandments.

I expect that my same objection will apply to the other articles you plan on writing because the idea of "disproving" commandments is nonsensical. If, however, you want to argue that Russell's commandments have no moral value, then you would at least have a chance of saying something meaningful.