Does the ceremony of oath in the courts around the world have any significance?
Synthesized from Source
definition
"Truth should rest on individual responsibility and empirical verification, not on the hollow rituals of oaths that bind neither the liar nor the seeker of truth."
According to Osho, the courtroom oath is a meaningless relic of religious superstition. It once manipulated fear of hell to coerce truth, but in a scientific age it neither binds liars nor honors the evolved person’s integrity; it can even legitimize lies. Truth should rest on individual responsibility and empirical verification—use evidence and lie-detection, not holy books and empty rituals.
Swearing on a holy book doesn’t make people honest; trust real integrity and use science to check truth instead.
Why this matters practically
- Encourages personal integrity over fear-based compliance.
- Promotes evidence-based justice (e.g., lie detection) instead of superstition.
- Reduces reliance on rituals that can inadvertently shield deception.
- Promotes evidence-based justice (e.g., lie detection) instead of superstition.
- Reduces reliance on rituals that can inadvertently shield deception.
AI Confidence Score: 97%
Read Original Discourse →