Discussions
How Free Is Your Thinking?
Posted by OrnaRoss • 12/11/08 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: atheism, freethinking, religion
I have been thinking about freethinking.
www.ornaross.com/freethinking/2008/12/how-free-is-your-thinking/
I’m wondering: could we reclaim the Freethinking concept, make it over a positive, creative, spiritual force, rather than a negative, destructive and anti-religious protest?
Could we have a Freethinking movement that is intelligent, inquiring & informed AND tolerant, open and contemplative?
Could we have Spiritual Freethinking? Creative Freethinking? Inspirational Freethinking?
Is this possible?
What do you (free)think?
User Comments
-
Hi Orna, nice to meet you.
I like thrill and suspense, are your novel in that line?
Sorry for the off track -
always fond of a digression! Yes to suspense but the thrills tend to be of the emotional kind.
-
Thanks for the reply. you have done lot of novel, Well done
-
-
I'm not free. I'm about 100 to 120 per hour.
Discounts for bears, pandas and other furry cute type of animals -
I like the way you describe it. I am totally with you in this, spiritual freethinking, or rather free thinking that ALLOWS spiritual aspects would be welcome in my mind. Something that doesn't rely on holy books for guidance but allows the mind to go to places it has never gone before...
A lot of "free thinkers" forbid themselves from even considering the possibility of something that hasn't been scientifically proven. That, in my mind, restricts the thinking. Science would have never advanced, if people would take "it can not be proven" seriously. We would still live on a flat planet, the Sun would go around the Earth and there certainly would not be such unseen thing as electricity.-
@ sebastyne - absolutely! Science, like religion, is a human construct -- though one that has added a great deal more to the sum of human knowledge. It is far from having an explanation of everything, though.
-
-
It is very hard to unwind the religious programming because it is so embedded in our culture, we get it through our upbringing and also genetically. I like the idea of not going into conflict with it, however it can be difficult. I've recently started a blog to expose pedophiles in the church because I was a victim when I as 11 years old. healingtreesformen Dot wordpress Dot com , so you may find that many people are bitter. Yes I find the standard religious template that used as very limiting. I think it's possible to just say, ok, I've outgrown that view because it is a prison house and move on. Ultimately, I'm confident that all opinions about God must go in an effort (or lack of) to contact the God Thing.
-
I think it is a great idea to offer a platform for breaking silence. The problem is that the suffering that arises from damage can lead to narrow, self-defeating thoughts and behaviours. It sounds like you are very aware of the dangers. Good luck with this work.
-
-
I believe in tolerance and respect of all individuals and their beliefs. However, being a student of human nature tells me that there will always be conflict when it comes to religion and what others choose to do. Certain groups will always try to dominate other groups there will never be an even playing field in this system of things.-
Perhaps if we believe that to be so, it helps to create this very situation that we don't want. What if we were to believe it possible? What if we were to think of ways in which we might foster this possibility?
-
-
I don't call myself a freethinker although I do understand the use of rationality. I recognize that no human being can be completely rational. I try to use both rationality and systematic thinking when I make decisions. Rationality in the style of Descartes tends to break things down into small parts and not take the whole of a problem into account. It is a part of a solution, but often fails in chaotic systems. I also like to think things through on both an emotional and a rational basis. I believe emotion is the precursor to higher order reasoning both rational and spiritual.-
Interesting thoughts. I think we must accept what is proven, informed, and reasonable and build belief systems from there, rather than unthinkingly accepting what is handed on to us. That post-rational beliefs (in, for example, a transcendent life force) are of a higher order than pre-rational beliefs (in, for example, astrology).
-
-
It's probably impossible to be completely unbiased in your thinking. There's not enough time to fact-check everything, so sometimes you need to rely on the credibility of the source.-
agreed on the fact checking. But what about persisting in beliefs that are clearly outmoded by science -- like creationism?
-
-
Free, not at all. We are programed by the stimuli from our environments, from our experiences, these things condition and ultimately determine how and what we think. Had you of been born in another country like northern Korea for example, "You" and your thinking would be quite different becuase of how the environment conditioned you.-
Is this not all the more reason to try to free oneself from culturally imposed limitations on our thinking?
-
Any attempt to free oneself from this is in effect caused by the very environmental conditioning your are trying to be free from. So to attempt to be free from it was ultimately determined by it and therefore still not free.
-
-
I'm trying. I agree that it's probably impossible to be a real free thinker but at least we're trying. Not like a 'close-minded' people usually in but not limited to religious organizations, that whatever the leader says they must believe and obey.-
Agreed. And how might we foster a positive environment for freethinking? I believe it's really worthwhile thinking about that.
-
-
What we really need are forums ... not groups. Tabs for differing topics open for discussion. Like: Political, Movies, Spiritual, Scientific, Free Thinkers, Homosexual, Heterosexual, Bisexual, ... you get the point. But it would be much easier to be allowed to go directly to the subject and join in or just read. I can see this as being the next hot thing from BlogCatalog.
And BC is HOT!-
You know, you're right. I think I might start a freethinking forum on my blog.
-
-
If you are incapable of free thinking, or envisioning, then are you not always going to be a creature of your past and doomed to continue repeating past mistakes? How does one grow and expand if they do not at least hypothize and test? The future is an unknown and would it not be better to face the future with a logic and a vision rather than an ideology?-
If you are incapable of free thinking, or envisioning, then are you not always going to be a creature of your past and doomed to continue repeating past mistakes?
We are conditioned by our experiences to learn from our mistakes, and therefore are not doomed to repeat them, but this in no way suggest that any of this was freely willed. It is but the result of causality.
-
-
i usually get a penny for my thoughts.
-
Free thinking is basically a philosophical concept based on facts, logic and rational analysis independent of factual /logical fallacies.
Some define freethought as being about the reasons an individual has for holding a belief, that definititon which would make your requests possible, but academically the concept requires "independence from logical fallacy" making what you ask rather difficult.
Creative free thinking - not sure what you mean here - based on reason and logic as the concept is "creative free thinking" would be based on what?-
That's precisely the point. I'm suggesting we accept what is factual, logical, reasonable and use it as a starting, not an end, point.
-
-
Fits in well with Finagle's Rule: Teamwork is essential; it allows you to blame someone else.-
Jack, jack -- you old cynic! You don't believe that, do you?
-
-
"free thinking that is not anti-religious"
Sounds rather oxymoronic to me.-
I believe it's perfectly possible to base our beliefs on rational, informed, educated positions, the holes in conventional religious thinking can be identified -- without being ANTI-religious. See www.ornaross.com/freethinking/2008/12/how-free-is-your-thinking/ for further details
-
I am not against of any religious organizations, but you can't consider them factual because its based on 'faith' not the 'truth' which might be unknown and might not exist. That is why freethinking has the tendency to be anti religious. And IMHO, free thinkers must not have leaders to dictate them what to think, that's why they're free thinkers.
-
ornaross "I believe it's perfectly possible to base our beliefs on rational, informed, educated positions, the holes in conventional religious thinking can be identified -- without being ANTI-religious"
I disagree. I do not believe one can be a free thinker when one's mind is fettered with religious limitations. When free thought is antithetical to a piece of dogma, one must choose: free thought or religion. In this, there are no grey areas.
-
-
I'm very much in favour of free thinking, in the sense in which I understand that term. But it's essential for the effectiveness of any discussion involving two or more people to be totally clear about what the term actually does mean. And to agree on what it means for the purpose of the discussion, BEFORE you begin. This is to avoid misunderstandings and talking "at cross-purposes".
And yes, I know I'm always saying that... -
i'm against all forms of substance abuse ... wait, did you say free thinking .... ah, i thought you said free basing .... -
Not that I've finally taken the trouble to read Orna's post, and seen that she very helpfully and sensibly does indeed define her working meaning of the term, I can say that yes I'm in favour of free thinking in her definition too.
However there is one small point that bothers me about the definition, and that is "established belief". In former times, for instance in the Victorian era when the Freethinker magazine first started up, it may have been quite easy to identify what the established belief was, and what the established religious organisation was. Today it isn't quite so simple.
The established church in Ireland is the Roman Catholic church. Now if a Muslim is living in Ireland, and her beliefs differ from the established belief, are we to define that person as a freethinker? Probably not. It might be argued that Ireland is a small country, and the RC church is established in that country but not in others. There are many countries in the world where Islam is the established religion. So, the argument could continue, the Muslim living in Ireland, while not aligned to the establishment in her country of residence, is nonetheless aligned to a system of belief which is established in some part of the world.
So the geographical parameter of the "establishment" has to be considered. But if we look at it in a global context, what belief or organisation can we point to as the one from which our beliefs differ?-
I define "free-thinking" not as a rebellion against an established doctrine of thought (secular or religious) but as reasoning outside the fetters of established doctrine.
A devout Muslim in Ireland, therefore, cannot be classified as a free-thinker whereas a Muslim in Afghanistan who does not believe Muslim dogma...but continues to practice the religion out of fear of repercussion...can be. -
To SweetViolet: As usual you express your argument so clearly and concisely, that's a skill I have yet to learn, I'm sorry to say.
Yes, in the example you gave, the plight of the freethinker is not one we would envy her for, but in a sense, it is quite a simple situation. It's very clear what the establishment is. But in America or Europe? What is the establishment? What is our established body of doctrine? I suppose it would have to be whatever religion each of us were raised in?
If so, this might be a serious obstacle in the way of a unity of freethinkers. There's nothing unites people so effectively as a common enemy. But where is that common enemy?
-
-
It's actually easy: all "groups" have established doctrines. You just take any doctrine or established line of thought, whether it is political conservatism or liberalism, religious or secular, politically correct or incorrect, and play devil's advocate.
Once you have the established thought and its antithesis, weigh the various points against each other and make up your own mind.
It is through true free-thinking that you come up a person who is, for example, fundamentally liberal but who doesn't favour gun control or labour unions.-
I agree totally, except I'm not sure about one little thing. What's wrong with labour unions?
-
-
Yup, I think we can be positive free thinkers
-
Yes, positive free thinking seems more the way to go. I was a bit worried that our definition was a bit too negative - you know, defining ourselves by saying what we are NOT rather than what we are.
-
Why must it be one or the other? Doesn't classifying it as "positive" or "negative" essentially negate the "free" part of it.
I see true free-thinking as being neutral and without bias towards or against a predetermined value of positive or negative.
Example: conservative thought supports XYZ; liberal thought does not. A free thinker may ultimately take either position, but only after weighing the pros and cons of both sides without bias, and interjecting any original thought (regardless of alignment) that may come forth. The conservative thinker will find ways to reject the liberal and unsupporting original thought in order to support his own position; the liberal thinker will find ways to reject the conservative and unsupporting original thought for the same reason. The free-thinker will examine thought from all sources, weigh them against each other, and derive an independent conclusion which may, in some ways, align with existing thought. But it will have been derived independently and without predisposition. -
That looks like the beginnings of an excellent manifesto...
-
It's the way I like to think.
I hate it when I find myself knee-jerking one way or another and make myself sit down and actually think about things. Nothing is cast in concrete, either, as new information comes along all the time and it requires evaluation in context with the pre-existing information and new conclusions drawn. Once you get accustomed to this kind of thinking, however, most "new info" evaluation happens quickly.
The key is, you have to make up your own mind without bias and you have to be willing to change your position with the advent of new information. That doesn't mean to have to change your position, but that you are willing to give up what you believed before if contrary information comes to light and, after weighing it, it is more acceptable than your previous conclusion.
I self-identify as a liberal because the majority of my conclusions end up aligning with liberal thought. But not all of them...definitely not all.
-
-
Sweet Violet,
Nothing is cast in concrete, if one thinks. The trouble is defining thinking and separating "welschaunng" from ideology in regards to thinking. Morganj loves to talk about thinking as conditioning and or caused by prior experience. Then all we would know is that which we could link to prior experiences.
In regards to "faith" lets not forget that logic requires "faith" when it involves the unknown.
In regards to liberalism vs conservatism....it used to be that conservatives were quite logical. That has changed and their rhetoric does not match their actions..-
Sweet Violet, we agree in many ways. I do not want to give the impression that I am religious - I am not - but neither am I atheist. The one is as defining and confining as the other, to my mind. There is a zone of mystery, of unanswered and ( believe) unanswerable questions. Freethinking in this new sense means more than just finding a place with regard to already articulated positions of religion or politics or whatever. It means extending the very boundaries of our thinking -- into the newly imagined and conceived. This is how human potential evolves. As GB Shaw put it: "Some men see things as they are and say why. I dream things that never were and say why not."
-
-
filosofia: "this might be a serious obstacle in the way of a unity of freethinkers. There's nothing unites people so effectively as a common enemy. But where is that common enemy?"
I think you've hit on an important point here -- and one of the reasons why freethinking is not more established.
In the absence of a common enemy (or in the presences of so many different starting points) how do we get unity among freethinkers? We need numbers if we are to make our influence felt. -
OrnaRoss...
The enemies are ideology, dogma, entrenched special interests, arrogance, hubris, tradition, stupidity..... -
@ Worldoftao, do we need enemies in order to know what we (free)think? When we take an enemy, do we not connect ourselves to them and their thinking? I was not suggesting that we find enemies, more that we find other unifying points between freethinkers
-
OrnaRoss...
An enemy does not necessarily represent a threat as much as a limit. We all have degrees, or potential for, of ideology, dogma, and all the other things I listed within ourselves. It is these issues that can keep up from unifying our own thought and unifying with fellow free thinkers.
By the way, there is ying and yang in regards to thought. I am not aware of what I think unless I become aware that I am not thinking...
Sometimes you do not think until you ask the question, "whats wrong with my thinking..." or "...maybe they are right?" -
A free thinker means to me: a person who has removed all trauma and negative from their thoughts. They are free to think without their mind trying to avoid negative moments in their lives. The trauma has been removed. They feel free to experience live as it was meant to be. -
Freethinking is bad for Work Camp... Goodthinking is good for Work Camp -
If you are freethinking and oppose closedthinking then really you are closedthinking to closedthinking and therefore not really freethinking at all. Hypocrite.-
what if you're closedthinking to gooodthinking?
-
that would make you a psychopath
-
Haha. -
i meant "Nineteen Eighty-Four" type 'goodthinking'
-
that would make you a liability
-
-
Free thinking What a joke, at all time real free thinkers are in the tiny minority; try free thinking in front of an hostile crowd brainwashed by their country leaders...
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
