Happy Atheist Forum

Are there a set of rules that it would be reasonable to expect all people to live by irrespective of their world view? If you think there are put one here. Don't make a big list please, it gives the chance for more people to contribute.

One may only kill another person:

1) To save your own life in self defence
2) To save the life of another person who can not defend themselves

Agree/disagree?

Those will be great until we get to the point where we are so overpopulated we are competing for resources... not at the world political level, but at the local levels within borders.  Some day the choices will be kill proactively or die starving.  When the deer population here gets too high, extra deer tags are issued out of season in a practice called "culling."  Eventually we'll need to cull the human population, as horrifying and heartless as that may sound.

Edit*  Since Twentythree cannot tell this is an opinion, I offer my disclaimer.  All things I say in forums are opinion, or in jest, unless I say otherwise.  I did not feel I presented anything in the above as fact, as I did not say "facts are" or "that's a fact," nor did I present studies, statistics, nor "as the god known as fester30 has written."  I'm just chatting in a forum, not presenting my dissertation.

Do not speak or write anything presented as fact that you cannot prove. Opinions and analysis may be expressed but these opinions may not be camouflaged as truth.

Quote from: "Twentythree"Do not speak or write anything presented as fact that you cannot prove. Opinions and analysis may be expressed but these opinions may not be camouflaged as truth.

Does my edit to my previous post satisfy the forum rules police with your 59 posts?

*Source for 59 posts was from the profile information to the right side of Twentythree's post directly above mine.  That total will change whenever he adds posts.  The "his" was taken also from that same profile information, where it says twentythree is male.

On my screen it says he has made 54 posts.

Quote from: "Cecilie"On my screen it says he has made 54 posts.

D'oh!

I formally submit a retraction on an earlier post when I said Twentythree had 59 posts.  If he had more than 59 posts right now, it would be more understandable (opinion) as the profile information seems to update with the number of posts an author has made (no statistics, studies, or proof, just assuming here, so take that for what you will).  Twentythree to this point has made 54 posts.  I humbly apologize for any confusion or for any questioning of childhood numerical education this may have caused.

Quote from: "fester30"

Quote from: "Twentythree"Do not speak or write anything presented as fact that you cannot prove. Opinions and analysis may be expressed but these opinions may not be camouflaged as truth.

Does my edit to my previous post satisfy the forum rules police with your 59 posts?

WTF are you going on about?  This thread is about "rules we all should be able to live by."  Twentythree posted a rule we should all be able to live by; it had nothing to do with your post or the number of posts twentythree has made.

Fester, it was a rule we should live by. More directed at the slew of infotainment that is hurled our way on a daily basis than the posts presented in this forum. Also the suggestion was made from a stance of "in an ideal world..." I know that it is impossible to expect purely factual information to be presented in every argument it's just what I would prefer and under this topic i thought it fitting. I apologize if I offended you and I certainly did not mean to come across as an authority figure for this or any other forum.

Quote from: "Twentythree"Fester, it was a rule we should live by. More directed at the slew of infotainment that is hurled our way on a daily basis than the posts presented in this forum. Also the suggestion was made from a stance of "in an ideal world..." I know that it is impossible to expect purely factual information to be presented in every argument it's just what I would prefer and under this topic i thought it fitting. I apologize if I offended you and I certainly did not mean to come across as an authority figure for this or any other forum.

I'm sorry.  Coincidence of timing after my post where I had mentioned overpopulation and all.  I'll work on getting that foot out of my mouth

Quote from: "Tank"Are there a set of rules that it would be reasonable to expect all people to live by irrespective of their world view?

There are none. Your very question reeks of religious overtones. Indeed, it stinks. I suspect you burn incense to a fat little Buddha you keep hidden somewhere in your home.

Quote from: "AreEl"

Quote from: "Tank"Are there a set of rules that it would be reasonable to expect all people to live by irrespective of their world view?

There are none. Your very question reeks of religious overtones. Indeed, it stinks. I suspect you burn incense to a fat little Buddha you keep hidden somewhere in your home.

Yes, our legal system is based on that of the Greeks and Romans with all their numerous gods.  Do you believe in their gods?

Everyone should be able to not murder...yet pesky religious and political ideologies drive wars.

Are you looking for objective rules or are you just thinking about what ought to be objective but isn't because some people are easily manipulated by political/religious beliefs?

Quote from: "AreEl"There are none. Your very question reeks of religious overtones. Indeed, it stinks.

   Care to elaborate?

Quote from: "fester30"

Quote from: "Twentythree"

I'm sorry.  Coincidence of timing after my post where I had mentioned overpopulation and all.  I'll work on getting that foot out of my mouth

No worries, I actually agree wholeheartedly that overpopulation will ultimately be our downfall. When we are forced directly or indirectly to compete for basic necessities will be when our precious societies collapse.

Quote from: "AreEl"

Quote from: "Tank"Are there a set of rules that it would be reasonable to expect all people to live by irrespective of their world view?

There are none. Your very question reeks of religious overtones. Indeed, it stinks. I suspect you burn incense to a fat little Buddha you keep hidden somewhere in your home.

Then you suspect wrong and presume far more than you should given the evidence you have to hand, but then being a theist that's the way your world works isn't it? Know next to nothing and assume everything  :D

Quote from: "Tank"Then you suspect wrong and presume far more than you should given the evidence you have to hand, but then being a theist that's the way your world works isn't it? Know next to nothing and assume everything  

Now my feelings are hurt!  

 

Quote from: "AreEl"

Quote from: "Tank"Then you suspect wrong and presume far more than you should given the evidence you have to hand, but then being a theist that's the way your world works isn't it? Know next to nothing and assume everything  :D    

Now my feelings are hurt!  

 :)

Quote from: "Tank"One may only kill another person:

1) To save your own life in self defence
2) To save the life of another person who can not defend themselves

Agree/disagree?

Disagree

I have sympathy for someone killing an abuser in certain circumstances.
Some killing during WWII was probably justified.
If someone was going to push a button and blow up the Sydney Opera House (no one injured), I'd excuse someone shooting him, the thing cost a lot of money and probably a few lives as well.  There is also the opportunity cost of rebuilding it, this could be equated to lives not saved through new hospitals foregone.

If modern lawmakers were making a new ten commandments I think there'd be a thick volume of exceptions for each rule.  I don't know if the bible is supposed to do this, if it does it probably needs a rewrite.

Though I regret being nit picky, I agree with The Magic Pudding, in the sense that situations are oft so unpredictable, especially throughout time, that I don't think there are many things we can comfortably say should always happen. I think humans aiming to do as little harm (in general) as possible is a good rule, though, it is vague enough.

One word: Hedonism

Maximize pleasure, and minimize suffering. Used wisely it would solve a lot of problems.

Quote from: "Tank"Are there a set of rules that it would be reasonable to expect all people to live by irrespective of their world view?

No rigid set of rules, no... Rules, you see, they tend to ignore the differences in people and sometimes that leads to more misery than is healthy.

QuoteOne may only kill another person:

1) To save your own life in self defence
2) To save the life of another person who can not defend themselves

Agree/disagree?

I'd remove number two unless the person in question was directly affiliated to you, like a friend or family or co-worker, or unless that person asked for saving. (Yelling "HEEEEELP!!!" would be the example of that. I don't mean coming over to you while being stabbed and asking "Sir, would you mind awfully hitting that man over there with a tire iron?")

In Theory:

Rule 1: Do not take any action that interferes (negatively) with another person's life, property, or happiness without permission from said person.
Rule 2: Rule 1 is to be ignored if it is possible to prevent someone from breaking Rule 1, but such an act would violate Rule 1; for the duration of the action taken to prevent Rule 1 from being broken.

In Practice:
Rule 1: Don't be a dick.
Rule 2: If someone's being a dick, stop them.

If everyone followed those two rules, we'd have no problems.
(Technically, if everyone followed the first rule, we'd have no problems, but Rule 2 is a safeguard.)