Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

any freethinkers here?

Page 5 of 6 [ 81 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

daniel3103
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 7 Aug 2010
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 122
Location: Rotherham, Yorkshire

12 Aug 2010, 12:43 pm

Exclavius wrote:
While in absolute principle, freethought is not possible, as has been said over and over here. But it is the attempt to be a freethinker, and the success one has in moving towards it that is the core of issue. Not whether someone can be "perfect"


Absolutely!



daniel3103
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 7 Aug 2010
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 122
Location: Rotherham, Yorkshire

12 Aug 2010, 12:49 pm

greenblue wrote:
well, the issue is that a freethinker may be more likely, and this is my opinion, to be related to liberty and freedom of expression, in essence, something that it is possible within democratic societies that values liberty and also values the existence of different ideas. I mean, in totalitarian regimes which they censor and punish anything contrary to their own political ideology, I would consider its people to not be "freethinkers", when it comes to not persuing and expressing opossing ideas that are forbidden to avoid punishment.


I think there are two separate issues here. One is whether an individual is a freethinker, i.e. thinks rationally on the basis of evidence, and freely of imposed doctrine. The other is whether you are allowed to express your views publicly.

You can be a freethinker even under a repressive regime. You're just not allowed to express your views publicly.



daniel3103
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 7 Aug 2010
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 122
Location: Rotherham, Yorkshire

12 Aug 2010, 1:03 pm

Exclavius wrote:

Each and everyone of us fight the battles with old ideas and behaviours that die hard every day of our lives. I'll never be free of the brainwashing I suffered as a child, though perhaps I would not want to be. It let me understand the enemy of thought, I know it well, and I can fight to destroy it now. I would not likely have the ability to fight as hard, had I not suffered what I did. Nor would I have the desire.



Similar situation here. Having autism makes the world a very confusing place to me. The way I was treated by my mother, who was autistic too, amplified the problem well into my adulthood, and still does so a little bit to this day. I have had to rely on seriously practicing evidence-based rational thinking, simply in order to understand myself and the world.



Exclavius
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 May 2010
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 632
Location: Ontario, Canada

12 Aug 2010, 5:46 pm

leejosepho wrote:
Do you believe you might have been better off if whoever did that alleged deed had instead left it empty?! But yes, I do realize you likely do not.


I would have been a different person, who would not be me.
Who is to judge better or worse? They are relative terms.

I would be more ignorant, and many would see that a virtue. That other me would've, this me does not.
I would likely "appear" to be more happy in life, though inside I would not be. I would struggle with the self-hatred that was bred into me. I would still feel guilty every day for not being able to just simply believe. I would not have read the books I've read. I would not have met some of the people I've met. I would not have done the things I've done. And although there are some things I've done that I would rather I hadn't, there are more things I've done that I can take pride in.

No, lee, I believe that adversity makes the self a stronger being. I believe living through pain gives us the strength to live through more pain. I believe that experiencing the utmost in depravity allows us to shrug off things that would've otherwise appalled us. Having looked into the face of oppression allows us to fully savor the taste of freedom when we are able to grasp it.



NeantHumain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2004
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,837
Location: St. Louis, Missouri

12 Aug 2010, 7:37 pm

Freethinking does not mean a person's beliefs are all absolutely founded in reason; that would be impractical (you rely on so many little assumptions just to get through the day). Rather, freethinking implies an individual's willingness to examine all ideas regardless of convention, taboo, or social approval. A freethinker is willing to entertain unusual or radical ideas on religion, politics, the social order, philosophy, sexuality, and so forth.



NeantHumain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2004
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,837
Location: St. Louis, Missouri

12 Aug 2010, 7:38 pm

Edited out because Wrong Planet's lag caused a double post.



Last edited by NeantHumain on 12 Aug 2010, 8:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

12 Aug 2010, 7:51 pm

NeantHumain wrote:
Freethinking does not mean a person's beliefs are all absolutely founded in reason; that would be impractical (you rely on so many little assumptions just to get through the day). Rather, freethinking implies an individual's willingness to examine all ideas regardless of convention, taboo, or social approval. A freethinker is willing to entertain unusual or radical ideas on religion, politics, the social order, philosophy, sexuality, and so forth.

The presumption is also that the "willingness to examine all ideas" is on a scale of human willingness as well? I am just concerned as nobody really examines all ideas or does so in a good manner. In fact, the average person is willing to brush off a *lot* of different ideas as absurd, such as UFOs, miracle claims for a number of different religious sects, claims of parapsychology, and so on and so forth without engaging in a lot of research on any of those matters. This itself shows an unwillingness to examine all ideas, but at the same time, do you know of many people who have actually been willing to take every extreme claim seriously?



NeantHumain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2004
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,837
Location: St. Louis, Missouri

12 Aug 2010, 8:06 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
The presumption is also that the "willingness to examine all ideas" is on a scale of human willingness as well? I am just concerned as nobody really examines all ideas or does so in a good manner. In fact, the average person is willing to brush off a *lot* of different ideas as absurd, such as UFOs, miracle claims for a number of different religious sects, claims of parapsychology, and so on and so forth without engaging in a lot of research on any of those matters. This itself shows an unwillingness to examine all ideas, but at the same time, do you know of many people who have actually been willing to take every extreme claim seriously?

A freethinker would be at least willing to briefly consider the existence of UFOs, but it may not be their top priority for ideas to mull over. It does not mean they are going to give as much in-depth time to absolutely any idea, but they're at least open enough to consider it briefly. For example, they may know more about Christian theology than the average Christian—while nevertheless disagreeing with it strongly.



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

12 Aug 2010, 8:32 pm

NeantHumain wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
The presumption is also that the "willingness to examine all ideas" is on a scale of human willingness as well? I am just concerned as nobody really examines all ideas or does so in a good manner. In fact, the average person is willing to brush off a *lot* of different ideas as absurd, such as UFOs, miracle claims for a number of different religious sects, claims of parapsychology, and so on and so forth without engaging in a lot of research on any of those matters. This itself shows an unwillingness to examine all ideas, but at the same time, do you know of many people who have actually been willing to take every extreme claim seriously?

A freethinker would be at least willing to briefly consider the existence of UFOs, but it may not be their top priority for ideas to mull over. It does not mean they are going to give as much in-depth time to absolutely any idea, but they're at least open enough to consider it briefly. For example, they may know more about Christian theology than the average Christian—while nevertheless disagreeing with it strongly.

What do you mean by brief consideration? It seems to me that either the person will be dismissing it due to the background knowledge they have (which is not necessarily too distinct from "convention") or they will be engaging in a good amount of research.



Friskeygirl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jun 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,865

12 Aug 2010, 8:56 pm

ruveyn wrote:
I charge for my thoughts.

ruveyn

oh 1cent



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

12 Aug 2010, 9:03 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
The presumption is also that the "willingness to examine all ideas" is on a scale of human willingness as well? I am just concerned as nobody really examines all ideas or does so in a good manner. In fact, the average person is willing to brush off a *lot* of different ideas as absurd, such as UFOs, miracle claims for a number of different religious sects, claims of parapsychology, and so on and so forth without engaging in a lot of research on any of those matters. This itself shows an unwillingness to examine all ideas, but at the same time, do you know of many people who have actually been willing to take every extreme claim seriously?


I'd put a lot of "extreme" ideas and whether or not they're given a fair intellectual shake into the realm of extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary proof; I think most people would have no problem examining them in depth if presented with credible evidence. However, if an extraordinary claim is made without said extraordinary evidence, I don't think it contradicts the idea of free thinking to disregard it out of hand without further investigations.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

13 Aug 2010, 9:07 am

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
NeantHumain wrote:
A freethinker would be at least willing to briefly consider the existence of UFOs, but it may not be their top priority for ideas to mull over. It does not mean they are going to give as much in-depth time to absolutely any idea, but they're at least open enough to consider it briefly. For example, they may know more about Christian theology than the average Christian—while nevertheless disagreeing with it strongly.

What do you mean by brief consideration? It seems to me that either the person will be dismissing it due to the background knowledge they have (which is not necessarily too distinct from "convention") or they will be engaging in a good amount of research.


All of that can be relative. One of my siblings recently called to let me know the first chapter in the book of Ezekiel says "'God' came to earth in an alien spaceship", thereby explaining those permanent "crop circle" kinds of things we can see from a high altitude over various places on the globe. At the moment, I neither dismiss nor further-research his report while yet listening/watching for reports from still others and loosely holding it all "in the mix" within my own mind.

Contempt sustains ignorance, and the delusion of believing one ever has a final answer can only produce contempt.


_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================


Blindspot149
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Oct 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,516
Location: Aspergers Quadrant, INTJ, AQ 45/50

15 Aug 2010, 1:48 pm

Yep


_________________
Now then, tell me. What did Miggs say to you? Multiple Miggs in the next cell. He hissed at you. What did he say?


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

15 Aug 2010, 2:04 pm

Dox47 wrote:
I'd put a lot of "extreme" ideas and whether or not they're given a fair intellectual shake into the realm of extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary proof; I think most people would have no problem examining them in depth if presented with credible evidence. However, if an extraordinary claim is made without said extraordinary evidence, I don't think it contradicts the idea of free thinking to disregard it out of hand without further investigations.

Ok, but what decides what is extreme? It seems to me that the deciding factor for extremity is often derived from cultural knowledge. (aka "convention") The reason I say this is because if let's say you came from a Pentacostal background. Well, in that case, the "extreme" claim of miracles is really just an everyday claim, wherein you and multiple people that you know will claim to have perceived a miracle. In such a case, there is little reason to regard miracles as extreme, certainly not miracles relating to the Christian faith, so to say that a resurrection happened 2000 years ago is just rational.

The issue is that if such an individual stuck to their dogmas, which are made rational by the background knowledge of miracles, which supports the idea of Christ's bodily resurrection, then we would clearly not regard them as a free thinker. The question is though, whether or not they are engaging in epistemic norms that are somewhat similar to normal epistemic norms or even "free-thought" epistemic norms. The answer to me, isn't that clear.



Adam-Anti-Um
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Dec 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 707
Location: West Sussex, UK

15 Aug 2010, 5:30 pm

I would say I am a freethinker.


_________________
"We can spend the rest of our existences stomping on the ants that are mysteriously coming out from under the refridgerator, or we can remove the spoiled food behind it which is causing the infestation to begin with." - Peter Joseph


Asmodeus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,520

17 Aug 2010, 12:28 pm

Free to follow logic as closely as possible. Ironic term? I believe it loosely describes me.