Replacing the Ten Commandments: Cooper’S Essays Guidelines for Creating a Good Life and a Civilized World: Cooper’S Essays Guidelines for Creating a Good Life and a Civilized World

By Stirling M. Cooper Sr.

For more information, please visit www.replacingthetencommandments.com

• Language: English
• Publisher: Xlibris US
• Release date: May 17, 2010
• ISBN: 9781450079846

Book preview

Replacing the

Ten

Commandments

Cooper’s Essays

Guidelines for creating a

Good Life and a

Civilized World

Stirling M. Cooper, Sr.

Copyright © 2010 by Stirling M. Cooper, Sr.

Library of Congress Control Number:                        2010906782

ISBN:                     Hardcover                             978-1-4500-7983-9

                               Softcover                               978-1-4500-7982-2

                               Ebook                                    978-1-4500-7984-6

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright owner.

Xlibris

1-888-795-4274

www.Xlibris.com

79751

Contents

Preface

THE WORLD OF IDEAS

Basic Assumptions

Essay One

HOW TO DECREASE THE CHANCES FOR WAR

Essay Two

LIVING WITHOUT RELIGION

Essay Three

FREEDOM AND RIGHTS ARE NOT ENOUGH

Essay Four

THE SOCIAL CONTRACT:

OBLIGATIONS OF SOCIETIES AND NATIONS

Essay Five

THE INDIVIDUAL’S SOCIAL CONTRACT: RELIGIOUS COMMANDMENTS OF THE PAST

Essay Six

A MODERN IMPLIED SOCIAL CONTRACT:

THIRTEEN NEW RULES

Essay Seven

MILITARY SERVICE AND

THE INDIVIDUAL’S SOCIAL CONTRACT

Essay Eight

FINDING VALID AND

MEANINGFUL PURPOSES IN LIFE

Essay Nine

THE PURPOSES OF SCHOOLING

Essay Ten

EVOLUTION IS ONLY PART OF THE STORY

Essay Eleven

REVERENCE FOR LIFE

Essay Twelve

WHAT CAN WE KNOW ABOUT

OUR LIVES HERE ON EARTH?

Essay Thirteen

UTOPIA AND HEAVEN

Essay Fourteen

ABSOLUTES: A ROSE IS BEAUTIFUL!

Essay Fifteen

TRAVEL AND PHILOSOPHY

Appendix

WHY MY FIRST BOOK WAS WRITTEN . . .

References and Comments:

Preface

THE WORLD OF IDEAS

Is it possible to improve the Christian Ten Commandments? Could they be replaced by newer, better directives for living?

I didn’t start this book with questions such as those. Originally I just set out a course directed at answering questions such as, What is the best way to govern a nation? and What do we know about living a good and moral life? The only limit I set for myself was to try to be as objective as possible. I decided to examine, and re-examine, many of the major writings and ideas of the past and present and judge them as though I had just dropped in from outer-space.

Also, I made the presumption that most Earthlings were, in general, very displeased with the turmoil and troubles of the present world. Rightly or wrongly, I sense a deep-seated fear about the future of mankind—among most people I know and those I read about. It seems, to me, to be a time when the majority of the people of the world are groping among the commandments and Truths of the past for reassurances and stability, or they are looking for new ideas that will give them some hope and optimism. Long ago I chose to focus on the second challenge.

During my present writings (which have extended over the past 6-10 years) I surprised myself by discovering two quite important ideas: (1) Earthlings already know, in fairly good detail, the traits and conditions for a Utopian form of government, and (2) Earthlings generally know enough about what constitutes a good and moral life to create a personal Heaven on earth. The problems we have are in the doing—not the knowing.

What also surprised me was the quality of two of my discoveries: the Covenants of the United Nations and the Humanist Manifestos. Trying to be as objective as I could, it seemed to me that the world’s best wisdom, both from societal and personal points of view, the traditional religions of the world have been upstaged by secular thinkers and writers. Thus, I found myself going back to the Christian Bible and taking some hard, long looks at not just the Ten Commandments, but the whole array of directives about how to live.

From my perspective at this time of my life it is quaint to listen to public debates about whether or not to place the Christian Ten Commandments in public places. I think I could list many new commandments which would be of equal or greater concern and validity than the present ones. And regarding the official ones as God-given requires a high degree of gullibility and willingness to believe in fairy tales at any cost. The story of Moses and his stone tablets appears to be nothing more than a myth.

Although it is tempting to rehash some arguments and debunking by the atheists and agnostics related to Biblical stories, that borders on being tiresome and quaint. It’s been done—over and over—by thousands of writers and thinkers in the past few centuries. Long ago it became my goal not to focus on the problems, inconsistencies and myths of organized religions. Nor have I ever been inclined to join any group and make it my comfortable mental bedding ground. I am in no one’s box.

My philosophic interests and studies have been wide-ranging. Early in life my philosophical thinking was greatly influenced by two books: Emerson’s Essay’s and The Seeker. The Bible was always around to bounce ideas against, but early in life I decided much of it was irrelevant to modern times—except, perhaps Christ’s Sermon on the Mount. During my college years I took an odd variety of college classes in philosophy, including Eastern Thought, existentialism and the writings of John Dewey. Later, as part of a group of classes needed to renew my teaching certificate I even studied Nietzsche. On my own I studied works of the Humanists, Jehovah’s Witnesses and Reverend Moon. At various times I have read at the Book of Morman. A couple of years ago I read the entire Moslem Koran (Qur’an). Oh, yes, during the 1960s I was actively promoting and studying the philosophic works of Albert Schweitzer. (I am still impressed with his ideas under the umbrella of reverence for life.)

Politically, I have not been impressed with the level of most of the thinking. Marx and group were well meaning in trying to achieve some balance between the haves and have-nots, but their thinking was too naïve and out-of-phase with human nature. The United States really didn’t produce more than a handful of in-depth political thinkers, but Thomas Jefferson stands tall. Woodrow Wilson is worth a mention, and so is Eleanor Roosevelt.

The last person I have just mentioned, Eleanor Roosevelt, becomes a part of the amazing Covenants of the United Nations. Out of curiosity, if nothing else, I should learn more about her and the people who put together those most amazing documents. As I mention in this book, the Covenants fairly well cover the duties and goals of any civilized government—now or in the future. They are good enough to be chiseled in stone or gold (but I don’t think there is any need for that—hopefully not!) In my opinion the Covenants significantly outrank the Constitution of the United States. They are more comprehensive and more in tune with modern times.

I mention numerous sections and quotations from the Covenants. In a sense I am embarrassed to say that I really don’t have much to add to what is already known in regard to an ideal form of government and its principles. Although I was surprised to find such high quality thinking in the political world, I wasn’t about to pretend that such a wheel of perfection needed re-invention.

Well, almost perfection. I did go into the study of political thinking with a preconceived notion that there is something very wrong with the reasoning of politicians or the world would not be in the mess that it is in today. In part, my studies did confirm some very grave problems, but they were ones originating mostly at the personal level, rather than at the societal level. I finally came to the conclusion that the most grievous faults of politicians were due to promising too much to the citizens and demanding too little in return! The theories weren’t unsound. It was their application.

I would like to think that one of the new ideas in my book is related to the emphasis on personal discipline and responsibility. Such trite ideas are obviously not new, but one consistent trend I found in the Covenants and the Manifestos was to focus on the rights of individuals and groups—and the lack of focus on responsibilities. It’s easy to praise freedom; that’s attractive and easy. Asking individuals to be responsible is neither easy nor popular. America’s political leaders need to lead in entirely new directions. The churches and religious leaders are so bogged down in defending the faith (whatever it is) that their relevance is minimal or negative. And our colleges and universities are dangerously failing to produce great new thinkers or ideas.

Two or three decades ago I began a book which I tentatively called, I Cry Alarm. As I have reflected on the opportunities and problems of mankind in preparation for this book, I feel the urge to reaffirm that Cry. We not only face the potential of World War III or IV, but also we face a wide range of barbarians who are a serious threat to civilization itself. And these barbarians are a significant part of every society in the world. They can be identified by the way they label themselves: I am a . And they fill that blank with the name of a religion, a political party or some other group to which they have (at least mentally) sworn fanatical devotion and belief. They hold do or die motivations. In a world which has shrunk to such a small size, that kind of approach/obsession is terribly dangerous. There is no other rational choice than to search for new ideas related to the production of more civilized and moral nations—and individuals!

In spite of all the reasons for pessimism, I remain very pleased to live in a time and in a nation which has allowed me to think and act freely. It is thrilling for me to live outside of any significant national, social, religious or political boxes. Certainly this time in the history of the world is unique in that regard. It deserves to be a time for a great celebration of the potential for new philosophies and new kinds of human beings.

My book has many faults, but hopefully most of the weaknesses are due to the fact that I am touching on some fairly new and fundamental ideas. This book is not meant to lay down replacements for the Ten Commandments. The essays are not meant to contain final statements about any human need or problem. This first printing is but a matter of continuing searches in each and every topic. Hopefully, this first edition of my book may be a beginning of ideas which flow from individuals who have no national, political, social or religious identities. More important than any attempt to set forth profound ideas is the appeal for individuals to break out of their boxes and think about their human duties and responsibilities. It is a special wish that a son or grandchild will pursue these ideas as part of a family heritage, one that has often welcomed new and exciting ideas!

Basic Assumptions

Years ago I attended a lecture in Aspen being given by Mortimer Adler. I don’t remember anything about the lecture except that it was quite interesting and too long. Why I remember it was interesting is because I generally agreed with his philosophical thinking and the Aspen crowd applauded enthusiastically. The second comment, about being too long, brings me to the main reason why I mention this episode. The good Dr. Adler promised to present us with 10 (or some such number) reasons to support the theme of his talk. It took the better part of a half hour to get through the first point, and by simple mathematics my concern rose in regard to how long I would be sitting in the lecture hall.

Such thinking leads me to the following ideas.

Assumptions #1 and #2: Philosophers tend to be too long-winded, and they tend to be caught up in the scholarly rules and traditions of the past. It is likely that I will tend to fall into the first trap, but it is unlikely that I will fall into the second. With a few exceptions, I am NOT a product of any formal training in philosophy. I am indifferent or hostile to much of what is labeled as philosophy in our colleges and universities.

Assumption #3 is that the whole field of philosophy is pretty well ignored throughout the world, in large part because it is so involved with semantics and history that important and new ideas are indeed scarce. Most philosophers are experts in word manipulation. They can take very simple ideas and make them complex and obscure in meaning. Or, in the case of religious philosophers, they have become extremely good at making silly ideas look plausible. (Have you read some of the new explanations in regard to why we should accept Noah’s ark as a plausible boat?!)

Assumption #4 (and this is a BIG one) is that I have SEVERAL new ideas to share with you. Stating such leaves me in the position of being quite arrogant. According to Eric Hoffer, a self-made philosopher of the ’60s, it is rare to find a book with even one new Idea. In general I agree with that position, but I am going to step bravely forward and try to produce some original thinking among these essays.

Assumption #5 is also a BIG one. It is my position that I can come closer to—and maybe hit on—some new ideas because I am not in any major box. I am NOT a member of any religion, political group, crusade or what-have-you. I do feel some allegiance to the United States of America and to being a citizen of the Planet Earth, but even these allegiances of mine can be tempered by events and reasoning.

My ideas about boxes are so central to much of my thinking that I have toyed with the idea of writing a book called just that: Boxes. Briefly defined at this point, I will state that a box is a fairly organized collection of thinking that a person inherits or absorbs, during his/her lifetime. They are so much a part of nearly all humans’ lives that their basic personalities are in large part defined by the boxes in which they live. These boxes are expressed in such a way as, I am a Jew, a Democrat and an American. Or the boxes may be of a lesser kind, such as, I am a vegetarian, chocolate-lover and golfer.

Assumption #6 is pretty important, too: We live in a planned universe. Although the theories of evolution are relatively sound in many ways, the theories are often lacking in logic and support. Sometimes they border on being silly. We may even be in a universe still being planned—and not one changing just by mutations. (Please don’t put me in a Creationist box; go back and note that I am not a member of any religion.) One of my basic reasons for believing in a planned universe is that I feel that beauty can be absolute. A rose is beautiful, whether you think so or not! It was designed to be beautiful. No, I am not ready to believe that Someone plans it all, but I certainly assume that our lives and our universe are meaningful and amazing—and, in part, created. I do not wish this book to be considered the product of an atheist or agnostic. It’s true that I do not feel comfortable with the idea that God is some kindly old fellow in a white robe, and I do not agree with the idea that all we can know is the material world we see and experience. Besides, the atheistic and agnostic boxes are like all the others; once you are inside, you are expected to conform. Boxes tend to stop thinking and to focus on defending your box.

Thus, my Assumption #7 is: The various religious theories about God, heaven and life-after-death may be partially correct, but all are wrapped up in mostly silly myths concocted by man. I will explore this territory more in an essay entitled, Living without religion.

Every human being has a soul—an entity which survives our material being. That is my Assumption #8. Perhaps I should also add that I find no logical reason to reject the possibility that our souls existed prior to our birth into this life. As I grow older it seems clearer and clearer that my mind (soul?) and body are increasingly in conflict