I approach things with a scientific mindset. I combine that with my whatever incoming sensory data I receive and combining it with reasoning and I am slow to make broader conclusions than unseen-as-of-yet data may account for.
Perhaps in that sense, more of an engineering mindset because the answers have to be pragmatic in some sense and like engineers, attempt to account for the unaccounted-for-yet.
[for example: an engineer making a building cannot know EVERY POSSIBLE use of the building and yet, impossibly so, they have to account for the unknown ahead of time]
It’s not defunct but is simultaneously too broad and too narrow, too specific and too general. This doesn’t make it useless however.
Analogy: The word “set” in English. Look up how many definitions it had.
Yet far from being a useless word, it’s VERY useful.
There’s lots though. There’s names for God that cover every possible “Thank you” people ever uttered. Giver. Destroyer. Shines with the light of a thousand suns. Whatever. Lots of names.
he Jewish folks have a fascinating solution to this. They keep the name of God “holy” – that is, “set aside” – special, something you just don’t say.
That keeps it from being cheapened for them. They have lots of substitute words but it’s a bad thing for a Jewish person to use the actual name of God. This also annoys them when some Christian groups decide, “we can use it whenever” and throw it up all over the place. But they have an answer for that too:
They don’t hold non jewish people to the same rules they hold themselves. I always had respect for that aspect of their religion.
Here’s the 7 laws the Jewish people expect non Jews to follow. They themselves have like 600+ laws but they only expect 7 out of everybody else.
Considering how long they’ve been keeping this set, it’s not entirely unreasonable, although you might not like a few of them.
I could reduce it to 4.
3, 5, 6, 7
Those four I’m fine with as universal laws.