Freethought & Rationalism Archive

UniversalParadox · 03-11-2002, 04:03 PM

who said anything about an absense of free will?

John Page · 03-11-2002, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by UniversalParadox:
who said anything about an absense of free will?

Me. I think its relevant to answering the thread's question. What say you - yea or nay?

Cheers.

echidna · 03-11-2002, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Malaclypse the Younger:
A freethinker is one who rejects dogma and personal authority with regard to ideas. A freethinker, by definition, does not hold a objective proposition true by mere virtue of its being endorsed by any person.

Does "any person" include ourselves ?

(Welcome back BTW)

Jayhawker Soule · 03-12-2002, 02:13 AM

Personally, I think it's a silly term or, at the very least, an anachronism.

Malaclypse the Younger · 03-12-2002, 07:02 AM

Like all labels, the term "freethinker" is somewhat arbitrary and political.

The issue is not whether there are any similarities between people who call themselves "freethinkers" and those who follow "dogmatism", but rather whether there are substantive differences.

Most people who declare themselves freethinkers do so because the term describes their personal choice of a particular process at arriving at objective truth, which is substantively different from dogmatic methods from personal authority.

Also, if objective reality exists, it is unsurprising that freethinkers might freely arrive at similar conclusions--each coming to the same conclusion for him or herself. The presence of agreement proves only the existence of objectivity, not that freethinkers are dogmatic.

Malaclypse the Younger · 03-12-2002, 07:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by echidna:
Does "any person" include ourselves ?

I consider (as a freethinker) that my own personal authority is sufficient for holding personal opinions. Freethought, to me, rejects the authority of others.

However, as a freethinker, it would be a contradiction for me to espouse objective truth to others on the basis of my own authority. Rather, if I wished to persuade someone, I would encourage her to look for herself.

[ March 12, 2002: Message edited by: Malaclypse the Younger ]

echidna · 03-12-2002, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ReasonableDoubt:
Personally, I think it's a silly term or, at the very least, an anachronism.

I tend to agree. It's like calling oneself the Moral Majority. There's a subliminal implication that all others are immoral, or in this case, that all others are chained thinkers. Sometimes true, but not always I think.

Our beliefs are founded on what we consider knowledge, and ultimately this knowledge comes back to trusting in what we consider to be reliable sources. Few of us are perfect at judging what is reliable and what is not, and in the end, even those able to ignore the dogmatism of others, can sometimes generate their own.

Malaclypse the Younger · 03-12-2002, 06:42 PM

echidna

Quote:

Personally, I think it's a silly term or, at the very least, an anachronism.

I tend to agree. It's like calling oneself the Moral Majority. There's a subliminal implication that all others are immoral, or in this case, that all others are chained thinkers. Sometimes true, but not always I think.

True often enough, IMnsHO.

Quote:

Our beliefs are founded on what we consider knowledge, and ultimately this knowledge comes back to trusting in what we consider to be reliable sources. Few of us are perfect at judging what is reliable and what is not, and in the end, even those able to ignore the dogmatism of others, can sometimes generate their own.

What's important, again IMnsHO, is that we're trying.

Bill Snedden · 03-12-2002, 07:25 PM

I would agree with Bertrand Russell, who said,

Quote:

What makes a free thinker is not his beliefs, but the way in which he holds them.

Regards,

Bill Snedden

echidna · 03-12-2002, 10:54 PM

Agreed. Honest, constructive discussion is a damn good start.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-11-2002, 04:03 PM	#31
UniversalParadox Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 6	who said anything about an absense of free will?

03-12-2002, 02:13 AM	#34
Jayhawker Soule Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,777	Personally, I think it's a silly term or, at the very least, an anachronism.

03-12-2002, 07:02 AM	#35
Malaclypse the Younger Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: nowhere Posts: 416	Like all labels, the term "freethinker" is somewhat arbitrary and political. The issue is not whether there are any similarities between people who call themselves "freethinkers" and those who follow "dogmatism", but rather whether there are substantive differences. Most people who declare themselves freethinkers do so because the term describes their personal choice of a particular process at arriving at objective truth, which is substantively different from dogmatic methods from personal authority. Also, if objective reality exists, it is unsurprising that freethinkers might freely arrive at similar conclusions--each coming to the same conclusion for him or herself. The presence of agreement proves only the existence of objectivity, not that freethinkers are dogmatic.

03-12-2002, 10:54 PM	#40
echidna Veteran Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,832	Agreed. Honest, constructive discussion is a damn good start.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.