Someone, I can’t recall who, sent me a link to this over a week ago before Fakegate exploded. I’ve had it open in my browser since. Published in 1951, it seems prescient as we look at the global warming affair today. These ten commandments would apply well to the “robust” science of global warming. I wonder if Mr. Gore appropriated #9 for his own use?
Bertrand Russell A Liberal Decalogue (1951)
Note
This Liberal Decalogue first appeared at the end of the article “The best answer to fanaticism: Liberalism” in the New York Times Magazine (16/December/1951). It was then included in The Autobiography of Bertrand Russell, Vol. 3, 1944-1967.
It shows the usual sharp mind and tongue of Bertrand Russell, never more at ease as when presenting his unconventional ideas. From panarchy.org
Perhaps the essence of the Liberal outlook could be summed up in a new decalogue, not intended to replace the old one but only to supplement it. The Ten Commandments that, as a teacher, I should wish to promulgate, might be set forth as follows:
|
1.
|
Do not feel absolutely certain of anything.
|
|
2.
|
Do not think it worth while to proceed by concealing evidence, for the evidence is sure to come to light.
|
|
3.
|
Never try to discourage thinking for you are sure to succeed.
|
|
4.
|
When you meet with opposition, even if it should be from your husband or your children, endeavour to overcome it by argument and not by authority, for a victory dependent upon authority is unreal and illusory.
|
|
5.
|
Have no respect for the authority of others, for there are always contrary authorities to be found.
|
|
6.
|
Do not use power to suppress opinions you think pernicious, for if you do the opinions will suppress you.
|
|
7.
|
Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.
|
|
8.
|
Find more pleasure in intelligent dissent that in passive agreement, for, if you value intelligence as you should, the former implies a deeper agreement than the latter.
|
|
9.
|
Be scrupulously truthful, even if the truth is inconvenient, for it is more inconvenient when you try to conceal it.
|
|
10.
|
Do not feel envious of the happiness of those who live in a fool’s paradise, for only a fool will think that it is happiness.
|
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
redc1c4, as you correctly noted, “obviously, “Liberal” meant something different back then…”
Unfortunately, you didn’t follow through with your observation since “Conservative” also meant something very different 60 years ago than it does today.
Of Course, Bertram is speaking “Authority”, as in knowledgeable authority, expertness; not legal authorities such as the police have.
re: “Liberal” vs “Conservative”
Remember that this was written in the early ’50s. At the time, the word “liberal” had a meaning and connotation closer to what we now call “libertarian”.
I believe Alinky’s rules superseded these long ago.
Thank you for posting that Sean A and Anthony, it was a pleasure to read the antidote to fanaticism.
Pamela Gray says:
February 24, 2012 at 6:35 am
Actually, I think that list SHOULD be posted in schools at all levels. Behind the secretary’s desk, in every principal’s office, and on the wall of the Superintendent’s office and school board meeting room. It will be on my wall and I currently teach special education at the Elementary level.
It is a given that adults should adhere to this list. But it is never too early to teach children how to question and say NO, as well as yes.
It’s a pity the fanatics have practically won in hiding Common Law (Natural Law) with the deflection ‘democracy’ as something to be lauded and aimed for, all the better to hide our liberties from us..
“Government cannot grant freedom to the people because freedom belongs to the people by birthright. Government exists not to give the people liberty, but to protect their liberty.”
http://www.britsattheirbest.com/freedom/f_british_constitution.htm
“The whole structure of our present jurisprudence stands upon the original foundations of the common law.”
US Justice Joseph Story
I’ve never heard of the following happening in England, but I did read somewhere that an American jury did just this not long ago:
“Common Law establishes every person’s right to a jury trial and the freedom of juries to declare a person innocent. If a jury believes that a person has been charged under an unjust law, it has the right to acquit.”
The Royal Society’s motto:
‘Take nobody’s word for it’
Furthermore, pay no attention to authority or consensus; the last refuges of the climate rogues.
Carmen D’oxide, read up on classic liberalism and you will feel refreshed. Also read Feynman, eg: “Science is the system of not believing experts.” Authorities and “experts” should be given no more nor less respect than any other person. Their opinions also stand only on their merits.
The principle is known as “jury nullification”. It is anathema to the court system generally, for a variety of reasons. Judges usually forbid lawyers from raising the principle and will often declare a mistrial if they believe that there has been an attempt to “suborn” the law in this fashion. It doesn’t always work in favor of the underdog. Some trials involving police officers in NYC come to mind.
Allan M said @ur momisugly February 24, 2012 at 2:08 am
Much as I admire Russell, he was most likely wrong here. Aristotle was a great observer. The Git has an “extra” tooth at the right hand end of his upper jaw. It’s entirely likely that he failed to account for unerupted teeth in the jaw of an examined female. Here are a few of Aristotle’s observations:
As late as the 19thC, his description of the sex life of sea urchins, long assumed to be incorrect, was discovered to be accurate.
I am a great admirer of Russel, but, like Pompous Git, I too think he was a bit harsh on Aristotle.
Perhaps both Mrs. Aristotles were short of a tooth or two.
And if he had gone around Athens accosting strange women and asking them to open their mouths, he would most likely have got a punch in the eye or some very interesting offers.
RoHa said @ur momisugly February 24, 2012 at 9:20 pm
Hopefully not their front teeth 🙂
Necessity; the Tyrant’s plea
There should be an 11th “Never excuse behaviour in your friends which you would find inexcusable in others.” After all, if the Climategate hacker/whistleblower gets dismissed there will not be the same schadenfreude here as has accompanied Peter Gleick’s demise.
Myrrh “I’ve never heard of the following happening in England, but I did read somewhere that an American jury did just this not long ago: “Common Law establishes every person’s right to a jury trial and the freedom of juries to declare a person innocent. If a jury believes that a person has been charged under an unjust law, it has the right to acquit.””
There was a case in England a few years where a father shot and killed the man who had raped his daughter. He was acquitted by a jury despite there being one doubt about his action.
They’ve just changed the law in Ireland, from the only recourse allowed if being attacked in one’s own home was to run away to one can [now] defend oneself..
This “jury nullification” is interesting – do you have in the US, and I’m not sure I’m going to explain this well enough, what exists in Common Law in Britain – that police can’t pass off legislation, acts of parliament, as if they are “lawful” – the term “lawful” being particular to Common Law, and so the only Law in Britain, while legislation and acts of parliament even when called “legal”, are not therefore “lawful”?
Constraints of memory, but I recall something about the police if challenged on the “legality” of something they are saying is illegal and quoting some law – could be anything, ‘it’s illegal not to have a road tax’ for example, must not claim that this is the law if asked ‘under which law’? There’s some paragraph that sets out that if the police say it is law then they are committing fraud.
Something else was published in 1951 that is spot-on for understanding the global warming movement, The True Believer, by Eric Hoffer. Highly recommended.