Lets say for a moment that there are one million Wiccans in the US (just as a theoretical estimate) and you have encountered 200 of them and I have encountered 200 of them. You have stated your valid encounters with those individuals and I have stated my valid encounter with those individuals. My conclusion is very different from yours. Therefore, neither you nor I can accurately say that “generally” this is how this entire group is. I don’t find that conclusion to be the slightest bit illogical. If it is, I would appreciate some enlightenment so I may gain a deeper understanding of this situation.
I should also mention that since our methods of “experimentation” have most likely been completely different, it is not very likely that we would come to similar conclusions.
“If hundreds of encounters and time reading literature with NO counter examples isn't enough to make a statistical inference then I guess that nothing will.”

Certainly it is enough to make a statistical inference about the encounters YOU have personally had, on this you are correct. This however is not enough information to accurately prove a generality about a singular system, much less one with many branches and vast diversity. I am not sure what the motive was that brought you to an exploration of paganism, but is it possible that in your exploration was founded on finding the negative? If that was the case then you were certainly successful in your venture.

I can only speak for myself, but I know that often times I have sought knowledge wanting to find a particular answer and “magically” I came to the conclusion I sought out to discover. I also began to realize that in my exploration I discarded many things that I came across that were “positive” or “negative” (depending on the situation) even though, that information could have potentially changed the outcome of my search. Many times I have had to ask myself if I have come to a conclusion that make my personal preferences and prejudices palatable? Often times I have to force myself to look at the other side of it simply to balance things out.

I don’t believe that Wicca, in and of its self, attempts to explain the overall scheme of the Universe. It does not attempt to explain quantum mechanics, mathematics, physics or anything else of a scientific nature. Nor would I say that a mature or educated person (regardless of faith) discards what they know of those things, however extensive or limited that knowledge might be. Wicca (and most religion) is about communing with ones self and with what one perceives to be the Divinity. Should it? And why must it? Should Shakespeare attempt to explain physics or should we leave that to those who are scientists?

I think Wicca contains many valuable things, but I do not agree with all of it, nor does it demand that I do. A certain sect of it might demand that I walk a certain way, talk a certain way, etc., but I am free to move onto another sect that embraces what I believe to be true today. I am not a betrayer or a wiccan-hater if I leave or I later say – well, that was a wonderful experience for me, but I discovered things upon my journey that make this incompatible with what I NOW know. I am not excommunicated or damned to eternal pain and strife and I find that compatible with what I view the Divinity to be. That is one of the things I like about it. I find it completely illogical to establish a code of “ethics” that demands absolute allegiance to a system with the threat of harm for leaving.

I don’t agree with your statement that they have essentially created a dogma. Dogma is a definitive authoritative tenant, a point of view put forth as authoritative without adequate grounds or a doctrine or body of doctrines concerning faith or morals formally stated and authoritatively proclaimed by a church. I have not encountered any group that does this within Wicca. This does not mean that there aren’t those who do, for surely I am not omnipotent. But a group, certainly does not speak for the whole.

I am afraid I am presently ill equipped to debate the Chaos theory with you, or any of those you mentioned. Science never really turned me on in college, but foreign language – now we might have something to talk about. As I get older I find that I probably should have put equal passion into the sciences!

If your claim is that religion does not promote critical thinking skills, how do we then have critical thinking Christians, Jews, etc. as you stated? It is certainly not a hard and fast and infallible rule that if one is religious that they also lack logic and critical thinking skills!

But really, let's debate facts, not supposition or vague ideas that neither of us can pin point. So, will you take me up on my offer and point out specific examples within what I have presented, or with material of your own, about Wicca or a Wiccan sect that discourages critical thinking?

Brighid

Jess,

Thanks and it's nice to be here and I certainly plan on staying. I am not scared away easily. Ask the Catholics who believe I have been sent by Satan and quite possibly I have been, but that's an entirely different discussion!!

DC:

Could you please speak very slowly for the slow-of-mind moderator? She is having problems understanding what you are saying... (again, no sarcasm... I am just dense right now...)

I thought that was the 'entire' exchange... What did I do? I like wicca kosher...

I wanted to point out that a vast number of pagans (including wiccans) will never tell anyone (not even their families) of their beliefs... how many secret pagans have you included in your study?

huh? different sects are fundalmentally different in Wicca. Not to an outsider, of course, but to other pagans. The common perception of good fairies and fluffy unicorns and 'book of shadows' is merely the popular version. They are the vocal ones. The rest are very secretive (I had a long discussion with one about the wisdom of 'book of shadows'--- writing anything down is still frowned upon.)

Yes, they all generally believe for the most part in the double godhead of goddess/god, and yes they believe in magic, but... damn, I'm late!

But it is.

Let's use your numbers and make then worse for my estimate.

Assume 1,000,000 Wiccans.
Assume a mere 3% of Wiccans are critical thinkers. (I'm sure you'd claim more.)

If you assume an even distribution then your odds of meeting a critical thinker aftr meeting X number are as follows:

# met : odds
1 : 3%
5 : 14%
10 : 26.2%
20 : 45.6%
50 : 78.2%
75 : 89.8%
100 : 95.2%

Does this give you any insight why I hold the belief that Wiccans are generally not critical thinkers?

DC
http://www.digitalchicken.net

Go back and read it again. I think you didn't get it right.

DC
http://www.digitalchicken.net

DChicken,

Thanks for the number break down, I appreciate it very much! According to what you have presented, surely that conclusion is logical. But it is on the assumption that only 3% are critical, and this part of the equation is not based upon any factual data and therefore, it cannot be taken as conclusive data. So, certainly you have come to a conclusion, but are you willing to settle for incomplete and possibly inaccurate conclusions?

It's kinda like those reports you hear on TV about surveys done about Americans and voting. When I find out that only 600 people were asked these questions (out of the millions of voters) I just have to laugh. And then if you read the questions they asked - those are even more humorous sometimes.

SO, really all I am asking is that in this debate and sharing of information that we deal with factual instances, not just what my opinion or your opinion is based upon our individual and narrow experiences.

Give me some concrete examples not generalities and then we can work from there!

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

Brighid

Just another thought - in your equation, it is Wicca that is the denominator that is used to determine non-critical thinking skills in individuals. Could it be that prior to embracing religion these people were not taught critical thinking skills and Wicca and/or religion is not the common denomiator that equates lack of critical thinking skills to a particular group?

Are all critical thinkers irreligious? Can critical thinkers be religious, and of any denomination whether it be Abrahamic or Pagan in origin?

What are the specific restrictions you have found in Wicca that constrict the flow of free thought?

Oops - I realize this is more then one thought - so, it's a couple of thoughts!!

Brighid

You are proving my point by simply demonstrating that you dont understand it.

The higher the percentage of critical thinkers claimed then the less likely it is to believe given my experience.

I'll propose this condition. In order for Wiccans to be considered critical thinkers in general then 1 in 10 must be critical thinkers.

If we assume the real number is the bare minimum (i.e., 1 in 10) then the odds of meeting a critical thinker after 50 encounters is a whopping 99.5%.

The odds in this game simply aren't in your favor given my experience.

That comparison is not accurate. People can change who they vote for on a dime and they can lie to the pollsters. That's why the polls are taken on a daily basis near election time. I really don't think that these Wiccans are putting on an act or gaining critical thinking skills overnight.

Sorry. I am obligated to use my experiences and my critical judgements of other people alleged experiences. If I did not do that I would not be critically thinking.

DC
http://www.digitalchicken.net

I know I'm jumping into this conversation late, but I had to add my two cents...

WICCA in itself is a very modern religion (as many people above have pointed out). Wicca draws it's roots from several so-called pagan religions.

Generally speaking, certain traditions of Wicca draw their backgrounds from Celtic and early English pagan religions...the order of Avalon (as it is called now) and/or Druidismis one excellent example...I believe that you can trace those backgrounds to the time of the Stonehenge.

Of course, this depends on whom you speak to

I have several friends who are Gardener-ian variety wiccans. Every ritual aspect of Wicca with which I am personally familiar is a twentieth century invention, specifically the rites and writings. Without Crowley of Gardener I don't think there would be such a phenomena as 'Wicca.'

Meetings seem to consist of burning incense, invoking various nature entities, drawing magick circles and so forth. Maybe they are different somewhere else.

Most Wiccans I have met are peaceful, positive people. They tend to be ecologically minded. Most of them have cycled through a million and one different belief systems before they became Wiccans.

Much love,

Patrick