THOUGHT = CRIME

Author: 3RU7AL
Ethics
Philosophy
logiczombie
Libertarian
intp

Posts

Total: 28
Topic's author
#1
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
Gersonides (Levi ben Gershom, Ralbag, 1288-1344) also explains the tenth commandment as active planning (Exod 20:14):

וענין החמדה הוא שישתדל שיהיו לו, כאילו תאמר שיתן ממון לרעהו, שיגרש אשתו כדי שישאנה, או שימכור לו עבדו ואמתו ושורו וחמורו או אחד משאר קניניו, כי זאת היא תכונה רעה מאד להשתדל שיֵצאו קניני רעהו מתחת ידו אם לא יתרצה מעצמו למוכרם ולהוציאם מתחת ידו.
 
The meaning of “covet” is to attempt to attain something from one’s neighbor, for example, to offer him money to divorce his wife so that he can marry her, or to sell him his slave or his ox or his donkey or any other piece of his property. This is a very evil characteristic, to attempt to take away one’s neighbor’s possessions when he himself does not wish to sell them and part with them.
 
וכבר למדנו שהחמדה אינה בלב לבד, אבל יש עמה מעשה, ממה שאמרה התורה: ׳לא תחמֹד כסף וזהב עליהם ולקחת לך׳. ואמר עוד: ׳ולא יחמֹד איש את ארצך בעלֹתך לראות׳  — רוצה לומר שלא ישתדל איש לקחת אותה בעלותך לרגל; וכן אמר: ׳וחמדו שדות וגזלו׳.
 
We already know that coveting is not just in one’s heart, but that it entails some action from what is said in the Torah “you shall not covet the silver and gold on them and keep it for yourselves” (Deut 7:25). Similarly, [the Torah] says: “no one will covet your land when you go up to appear” (Exod 34:24), meaning to say, that no man will try to take it when you go up for pilgrimage. And [the Bible] says: “They covet fields, and seize them” (Micah 2:2).
 
ולזה לא יהיה עובר על לאו זה אם לא עשה מעשה באופן שיהיה לו הדבר שיחמוד.
 
Hence, we infer that one does not violate the prohibition if one does not actually do something in order to obtain the coveted object.

Thus, for Gersonides, the Rabbinic interpretation is the simple meaning of the text. In the Bible, coveting refers to the first step in the process of taking something from one’s fellow that is his/hers and not yours. Thus, it is not the flickering thought of coveting that is forbidden here, but rather when one seriously begins to plan how to actualize the sinful thought. [LINK]
And another interesting interpretation of "covet" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaFca9vZvn8
#2
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,346
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Well, some people actively seek therapy from mental health providers, because they find certain thoughts detrimental to their lives and/or other people.
Clinicians even organize detrimental thought patterns and behaviors in books.
It's not unreasonable, I think, for people to argue that certain types of thoughts are detrimental to an individual and his community at large.
To me, One reason religion has a number of laws and practices that existed because following those laws and practices appeared to improve people's individual lives, and those of their community.
Take the focus on being clean in some religions or practices, or in how they deal with the dead.
Maybe I'm reading too much into it though.

I 'do enjoy not having the thought police on my brain, personally.
Topic's author
#3
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Lemming
Well, some people actively seek therapy from mental health providers, because they find certain thoughts detrimental to their lives and/or other people.
This should be 100% protected by medical privacy and not subject to legal scrutiny.
Topic's author
#4
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Lemming
Take the focus on being clean in some religions or practices, or in how they deal with the dead.
I agree.  Many "religious" guidelines have very practical benefits.  However, these benefits are not contingent on worship of an unknowable cosmic peeping tom.
Topic's author
#5
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Lemming
I 'do enjoy not having the thought police on my brain, personally.
If I locked you in a room with a piece of paper and a pencil, could you commit a crime?

If you showed that piece of paper to other people, either by posting it in a public place or by giving away copies, could that be a crime?
#6
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 172
Posts: 3,946
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
If thought = crime, then it just furtherly proves that God is just a tyrant.
Topic's author
#7
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Intelligence_06
If thought = crime, then it just furtherly proves that God is just a tyrant.
Stop thinking or I'll have to report you to the authorities!!
#8
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 172
Posts: 3,946
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
-->
@3RU7AL
That is irony, I can tell.

*thinks harder*

*thinks even harder*

*thinks what to do if they arrest me for thinking by thinking*

*thinks how to not think by thinking*

*thinks about something that is nothing*
#9
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@3RU7AL
THOUGHT = CRIME

Thoughts come before crimes, everything happens in the mind and through thought before it is accomplished and materialized in the flesh. Every time you've seen a crime it first came through the mind (thought). So in spirituality, the process of personal growth..... it takes you a step deeper than just committing an action, it takes you to the roots of all actions which originates in thought and reinforced through emotion.
So it is fair to target the cause of criminal activity. 
#10
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Intelligence_06
If thought = crime, then it just furtherly proves that God is just a tyrant.

If you could first deal with the thought of a crime as it occurs in the mind, you've dealt with the crime before it was even perpetrated in the open. But in spirituality nothing is hidden from God, everything is in the open and seen, so thoughts are as crimes because they are one and the same to God as they are in the open. God knows that crimes happen in thought before they are done in the open. Which is why Ted Bundy warned the public that there are killers everywhere, some just haven't openly committed what they are already thinking.
I'm not even arguing for the Bible saying this, this is just truth as it pertains to human experience. And God's not a dummy, the Creator knows what we think and what we think we act on. This is why spirituality deals not with just actions alone, but with where they occur before they are openly committed. 



#11
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
Spirituality, or the process thereof helps the individual control not only what they do, but first what they think. If one can control the mind (thought), and even the emotions first...one can easily control their output, what they openly do. 
Topic's author
#12
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Intelligence_06
That is irony, I can tell.

*thinks harder*

*thinks even harder*

*thinks what to do if they arrest me for thinking by thinking*

*thinks how to not think by thinking*

*thinks about something that is nothing*
I'm dialing the thought-police.
Topic's author
#13
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@EtrnlVw
Spirituality, or the process thereof helps the individual control not only what they do, but first what they think. If one can control the mind (thought), and even the emotions first...one can easily control their output, what they openly do. 
This is great.

But only if the practice is PURELY VOLUNTARY.
Topic's author
#14
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@EtrnlVw
Thoughts come before crimes,
Not necessarily.

Many crimes are spontaneous.
#15
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 172
Posts: 3,946
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
-->
@3RU7AL
Well it is a right. I don’t see why there is a thought police.

*thinking intensifies*

Topic's author
#16
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@EtrnlVw
If you could first deal with the thought of a crime as it occurs in the mind, you've dealt with the crime before it was even perpetrated in the open.
IN THEORY.

IN PRACTICE, though, if you THINK IT THROUGH, you will realize that nearly every (real-life-physical-actual) "crime" you can imagine committing is not worth the inevitable consequences (even if the "cops" never catch you).
#17
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,346
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Well, some people actively seek therapy from mental health providers, because they find certain thoughts detrimental to their lives and/or other people.
This should be 100% protected by medical privacy and not subject to legal scrutiny.
Take the focus on being clean in some religions or practices, or in how they deal with the dead.
I agree.  Many "religious" guidelines have very practical benefits.  However, these benefits are not contingent on worship of an unknowable cosmic peeping tom.
I 'do enjoy not having the thought police on my brain, personally.
If I locked you in a room with a piece of paper and a pencil, could you commit a crime?
If you showed that piece of paper to other people, either by posting it in a public place or by giving away copies, could that be a crime?

A person's thought process 'does seem to become subject to legal scrutiny, 'once they have committed a crime.
It seems odd for a persons thoughts to only have become a sin, once they have acted 'physically upon them and been caught.
Seems reasonable enough to declare certain thoughts and patters to be bad.
Maybe not so reasonable to be an Orwellian society in which everyone's thoughts and actions are constantly monitored.
Having dirty dishes or an unclean room, can logically be declared 'bad, I think. Without there actually having to be an impetus to change said behavior, other than an individuals own will.

Well, I'm not religious, I just like noting that religion had/has practical applications.

According to some legal systems I 'think I 'could commit a crime in the first case.
And according to some legal systems I'm certain it would be possible to commit a crime in the second case.
#18
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
"You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart."

Jesus = Big Brother comfirmed

Yes bad thoughts are bad, but punishing people for thinking is ridiculous when we have freedom of speech.
#19
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,346
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@K_Michael
Not criticism, but curiosity,
How are people punished for thinking?
Related to religion I mean.

Unrelated to religion, we punish people often enough for their thoughts, though usually on their political or social views.
Through condemnation, or dislike, shaming.
#20
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@Lemming
People are encouraged to punish their own thoughts. They are taught that they should hate themselves for their sins.
The following  verses to what I quoted previously state
"And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out,
and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for
thee that one of thy members should perish, and
not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and
cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee
that one of thy members should perish, and not
that thy whole body should be cast into hell."

Take that as you will.
#21
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,346
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@K_Michael
'My take of it, is that if something makes it easy to sin, it's better to not have it.
Seeing on how many sins are related to the harming of others, it's better to remove something that harms others, than to keep it.
If for example you own a fancy car, and it causes you excessive pride and disregard and harm of others in your actions, better to sell or give the car away.
It's not a saying I think I'd take literally, most of the time, though I imagine some people have.

I suppose I'll also agree that 'some people are taught to hate themselves for their sins.
Whether in a religion, or behavior in a society.

I'd rather people practiced Love the sinner, hate the sin.
(Though I don't 'think that's from the Bible)
#22
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,346
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@K_Michael
Huh, actually, it seems two of my family members take that whole dismemberment literally.
Though there's some nuance to their point of view on it.
Topic's author
#23
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Lemming
If I locked you in a room with a piece of paper and a pencil, could you commit a crime?
If you showed that piece of paper to other people, either by posting it in a public place or by giving away copies, could that be a crime?
According to some legal systems I 'think I 'could commit a crime in the first case.
And according to some legal systems I'm certain it would be possible to commit a crime in the second case.
Do you think this is logically defensible?
#24
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,346
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@3RU7AL
If I locked you in a room with a piece of paper and a pencil, could you commit a crime?
If you showed that piece of paper to other people, either by posting it in a public place or by giving away copies, could that be a crime?
According to some legal systems I 'think I 'could commit a crime in the first case.
And according to some legal systems I'm certain it would be possible to commit a crime in the second case.
Do you think this is logically defensible?

From some points of view, I'd say so.
Depends on the societies values, laws, presuppositions, and what not.

Something making 'logical sense, only 'does so, based on what rules are in place.
At least I 'think such.
#25
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,205
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
It's  only illegal if you get caught. 
Topic's author
#26
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Lemming
Depends on the societies values, laws, presuppositions, and what not.
What do you personally believe is the ultimate goal (use-case) of "THE LAW"?
Topic's author
#27
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
It's  only illegal if you get caught. 
So, are you in favor of ARBITRARY ENFORCEMENT?
#28
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,346
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@3RU7AL
I'm not quite sure, having not thought deeply about it before. My eldest brother tried to get me to read The Law by Frédéric Bastiat, but I found it difficult to read.
Don't really have a strong opinion about it, but in America, I think the law exists To protect society at large, as well as the individual.
Perhaps people have difficulty balancing that at times, or individuals find their ethics and moralities at odds with others, of what is meant by living a fulfilling or righteous life,
To themself, or others.
Law can be different depending on where you go though, in the world.
Whether talking about countries, or more specific contexts such as parents, games, country club.