Once upon a time two people were having a discussion and one made a judgment the other did not like.
So her friend said, "Who are you to judge?"
The first replied, "Who are you to judge that I am judging?"
"I....uh, what?"
"I figure that when I make a judgment I am the same type of person you are when you judge me for making judgments. If so, I suppose that is who I am to judge, just like you when you judge." the one who judged said.
"Huh? No, by asking who are you to judge I mean that you're not supposed to judge because it is judgmental."
"Who are you to judge what is judgmental?"
"You just need to stop that, right now!"
"Who are you to judge me?"
"I asked first. So you have to answer my question first."
"It seems like just another questionable question. But who am I to judge? I am a sentient being, sentient beings think, which can become existential belief, which can become knowledge and then deeper knowledge when something is truly known. Knowledge is sound judgment and what people make further judgments based on. That is who I am to judge. I am not the "I AM that I AM." of scriptures because I did not claim to be sitting in ultimate judgment, just little judgments.
So....who are you to judge my judgments?"
"Look, I never meant for you to actually answer that question."
"I guess that questionable question is just your passive agressive way of saying that you do not know the answer to something but do not want anyone else to know either. So you just drag everyone down to unthinking, unknowing moral degeneracy with mentally retarded questions."
"What?! Why, I.....you are judgmental!"
Her friend just laughed.
3 comments:
Brilliant!
Can I post this on my site? (With a link, of course.)
Carl
Sure, glad you like it.
It is a silly questionable question, is it not? I can think of so many answers to it.
There seems to be some problem with the comments on your blog today. I was going to say something there. Someone brought up the "Who are you to judge...." in the Bible.
On the topic,
I was going to have the one who judged say something about some overgrown fetuses and have that type of issue call forth the bromide of the conditioned American brain.
I.e. make the issue of judgement deal with some transcendent ethical law rather than symbolic ritual laws that you mention. The symbolism of eating animals, keeping one day holy, kosher, etc., those based on the echoes of a creation narrative. The spirit of which are important yet the mode is not. It has a spirit, yet is not literal.
In Christianity all that is of symbolic law, like the symbol of Lamb of God, animal sacrifice again. Yet, Jesus was not a lamb. It's because people were not exactly supposed to eat animals in the first place, so you get animal sacrifice as a symbol of something to do with Good and Evil but it is "just" a symbol and the spirit/meaning of a symbol is more important.
Example, it is like people having different languages but what they say can contain the same spirit/meaning, in different modes. Most peoples still retain the patterns of the prejudice dealing with animal sacrifice and come the holidays people of many nations tend to repeat ancient patterns.
Oopsy...all I meant to note was that the overgrown fetuses didn't survive the edit.
Thanks for the comments guys, later.
Post a Comment