Vorkosigan

Alas, this wonderful talk must be removed to Misc Religion.

Vorkosigan

Marz Blak

SirenSpeak:

Thanks for your response. In it, you seem to relate your coming to theistic belief as a process of inference, which is fine; but in a couple of places I believe you have allowed presuppositions to slip into your chain of inference which I believe are not warranted by the evidence and therefore decidedly not examples of freethought.

For example, when you say, "...And I was asking myself why it was so hard to believe that God could have worked in evolution...how could that not be his way to create...?" I would answer with another question: why would you believe such things? What evidence in our understanding of the evolutionary process gets you to an inference of God?

Again, when you say, "...and I think that given just how different we are [from animals], there must be a reason for us to have evolved this way...." I must ask why must this be the case? Have you read any sociobiology or evolutionary biology? That approach to me seems much more satisfactory as an explanation for the evolution of sentience and morals, etc., than simply and question-beggingly ascribing it to God.

From where I sit, you seem to have fallen into a sort of trap of wishful thinking about mankind's significance in the scheme of things. It seems to me that, while freethought involves the desire and critical ability to evaluate any and all propositions rationally, it also involves the ability to check oneself from inferring beyond the available evidence for emotional or other reasons, and this seems to me to be part of how you got to where you are.

[ September 26, 2002: Message edited by: Marz Blak ]</p>

Keith Russell

Greetings:

Is being a 'freethinker' like being a skeptic?

As long as you question and doubt, you are a freethinker.

Once you decide you have enough evidence to believe that something is true, you have to quit 'the club'--or get kicked out?

Keith.

GeoTheo

I think to some people being a "freethinker" is really just another way of remaining undecided. A Suspension of belief. Indecisive? You can be skeptical of virtually anything, but is being a skeptic a goal? Or is finding out the truth the goal? I do not see why being a skeptic is a valuable end in itself. I think it is superior to having a false belief on a subject, but not an end in itself. How much thinking does it really take to not have a belief? After a point I think you pass from free thinking to non-thinking otherwise you would arrive at a conclusion.

Starboy

Webster's shows freethinker and dogma as:

Main Entry: free•think•er
Pronunciation: -'thi[ng]-k&r
Function: noun
Date: 1692
: one that forms opinions on the basis of reason independently of authority; especially : one who doubts or denies religious dogma

Main Entry: dog•ma
Pronunciation: 'dog-m&, 'däg-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural dogmas also dog•ma•ta /-m&-t&/
Etymology: Latin dogmat-, dogma, from Greek, from dokein to seem -- more at DECENT
Date: 1638
1 a : something held as an established opinion; especially : a definite authoritative tenet b : a code of such tenets &lt;pedagogical dogma&gt; c : a point of view or tenet put forth as authoritative without adequate grounds
2 : a doctrine or body of doctrines concerning faith or morals formally stated and authoritatively proclaimed by a church

If the believer is a Christian then no, since Christianity is dogma. If the believer has arrived at their beliefs by reason then yes (something that is impossible to do), especially if in doing so the person has examined all of their presupposed religious concepts critically and with an open mind. A feat that I have yet to see a professed Christian perform and remain a Christian. In all cases those that do examine all their beliefs critically and openly end up abandoning Christianity.

Starboy

Pseudonymph

Marz, Interesting thoughts indeed! Hmm...

But what exactly are we referring to here? I believe that if I came to these conclusions through rational thought and analysis, how is that not freethought? I think you may assume that I jumped to these conclusions through emotions or faith...but that was not the case however. I should have been more specific.

I realize that some of my beliefs may be based on emotion, but they are under constant scrutiny and examination by myself. This is for my own peace of mind.

Marz Blak

Siren--

I was merely responding to parts of what I assumed were your thought processes on the basis of specific things you said in that prior post (hence, the specific quotes). Of course I am sure that there's more to your thinking than the few things you said there.

HelenM

Why? If you make your own free decision to believe something, what is not freethinking about that?

I thought freethinking had to do with whether one thinks for oneself or not, not what one believes.

Even if most people here disagree that someone's beliefs are reasonable, why would that mean that person isn't a freethinker? Whether they are a freethinker has to do with whether they have freely thought through their [possibly irrational] choice of what to believe, surely...

Otherwise freethinker is simply being defined as "having the same ability to reason as me and having come to the same conclusions as me" - which to me, is not at all what freethinking really is. Or, is freethinking only possible if your IQ is over a certain number?

Helen

Philosoft

I think 'freethinking' must entail evidence that is objectively available. If all it takes to be a freethinker is to claim to have rationally and critically examined one's subjective beliefs, regardless of the evidence one can show someone else, then the number of non-freethinkers approaches zero.

Also, GeoTheo, where did you get the idea that freethinking and/or skepticism entails indecision?

Starboy

HelenM, do you hold the bible as the authority on your religious beliefs? If the answer is yes then you cannot be a freethinker.

Starboy