I hear a lot of atheists, liberals, rationalists etc claim to REAL free thought. All the while belittling, ridiculing and browbeating Christians, (and those of some "other" religion).
What they are saying is that they (the former) have "cornered the market" on the matter.
So, by default, if you (or I) have a belief in God, Scripture, the Spiritual etc, are devoid of (same) free thought.
What makes you a free thinker, as opposed to a "fear" thinker?
I would also like to ask, "What makes them free?"
Why a free thinker is the opposite to a fear thinker?
I didn't know freedom was the opposite to fear.
Of course, if you infer the fear enslave people, that's another thing.
Anyway it's a true fact that people that believe in Gods have a sense of fear an awe towards their Gods.
So they can never be free thinkers.
I'm a free thinker, because I'm detached of all sense of God, apart from being detached of many other things. but that's another story.
Here we are in the Relig forum ,so I answer accordingly.
Free - "I do not believe in god, because believing in something without any evidence is just silly. But I am open to the possibility if some proof or evidence of any of the infinite number of possible gods presents itself."
Fear - "I absolutely believe in the christian god and nothing will sway me. No facts, nothing will make me change my mind or allow me to be open to the possibility that I am wrong. "
See the difference?
I dont believe in God because I am afraid I believe because I CHOOSE to because of my OWN experiences that I have had happen to me... of course I cant prove them because they are personal.. the only thing I can do is talk about my own experiences.. but then again what good would that do? people will think i am a liar or will find a way to try to twist what I experienced around to what makes them more comfortable... I used to wonder the same thing about God and my favorite line was how can I believe in something I cant see? well after he proved himself to me because I SEEKED him was a HUGE answer to my question. It all starts within our hearts and what we are open to receiving and what our hearts REALLY desire... if you don't desire him or believe in him then you will never know him. Thats peoples answer to unanswered prayers and such... God knows your heart and what your intentions really are.
i can't help but feel annoyed when i read stuff like this and know there's stuff like this in the world:
as i have said in other posts MAN is REALLY the culprit here... and i cant help but get annoyed when MAN want to blame God for what MAN DOES!!
again, no one is blaming God.
they just wonder why he turns a blind eye to things like this while, say, getting someone's stuck car out of a snowbank so they won't be late for Thanksgiving dinner or something...
You say you don't blame God, but yet when God gives you what you want, you say differently. God will not force anyone to come to Him. God gave man dominion over the earth. It is man who is to blame for the fall of man. God allows it to happen because He gave us freedom to choose.
And, just look what you've done with it, a mess that will take generations to clean up.
You see, we don't have "dominion" over the earth, that's why you theists have screwed it up, as you seem to believe you can do whatever the hell you want here as your paradise is death, while for the rest of us, the earth is our paradise.
We are only "Stewards" of the earth simply by the fact that we have the faculties to do something about it.
Unfortunately, the damage you have already caused may very well be irreparable.
You're very good at not answering questions and not working through a discussion and tossing out unfounded beliefs and ignoring what others have to say, etc. etc. etc.
Of course, you're free to refute what I say, please do.
maybe thats because your questions really are nonetheless arrogantly stupid? just being honest not rude mind you.. for your questions really sound like something a defiant little 11 year old says to his mommie when he doesnt get his x box for x mas for not doing his chores like he was asked... we explained that MAN makes these things on earth happen and u deliberatley go and point a finger at everyone else as if to say u are perfect or something.. well my lovely little DEAR friend I have seen NO perfection in your writings therefor one can perfectly assume that YOU are not perfect and make mistakes just like the rest of us and YOU my friend are what the discussion of MAN is when we say "man made this world how it is". now I HOPE you actually understood that and really arent a fool or maybe you just like to argue by saying stupid things? to try and get under someones skin? I think so... and I have come to find out that MOST people I have met who act this way are VERY unhappy in their own little lives... so they find utter satisfaction at starting CRAP... which is absolutely irritating as all hell like a little gnat
And you are a great dram queen. Doesn't that make you feel so much better?
Unfounded beliefs only comes from your heart not mine. Mine are rooted and grounded in truth while yours are grounded in a fairy tale.
Answering questions is OK if the questions aren't set up for baiting. I am not a catfish.
Ignoring the crap that comes through your computer is what I am good at. For two years you have pointed fingers at God, Christians, and Jesus.
Nope, just those who accept those particular fairy tales. I can't point a finger at empty air and expect to remain sane.
CORRECTION QQQQQQQ the damage WE have done dont be a fool now.... stop blaming everyone ELSE you are MAN to.... unless you are an alien being or werewolf of some sort YOU TO my dear are part of the "screwing up" that you speak of!
yes you Q are a prime example of MAN. im sure sirdent knows exactly what im talking about
And I'm a WOMAN. I hope a prime example!
lol tantrum u know what i was talking about .... dont try and make this into another discussion here... your sarcasm almost killed my computer... no seriously it started smoking and everything LMAO
If you say I'm part of the same world in which theist thought and decision making processes ruled supreme, yes, I am.
But, unlike theists, I don't make my decisions nor use reason and rationale based on Bronze Age myths and superstitions.
I don't pretend there are ghosts and goblins and things that go bump in the night that would make me yield to my intelligence and intellect.
If anything, I would prefer to be remembered as being part of the forefront of change to a unified mankind that would see religions go the way of the dodo.
Some people would like to think that they have God in their back pocket; so-to-speak... as a Mobster might say concerning the police Chief in their town. There are many wrong concepts concerning God. I like to think that most people have at least a few beliefs that are close to being correct.
I believe what I believe wholeheartedly...I can only pray that some of my concepts are correct..
Then, you should be cowering in humiliation and guilt when you thank your god for your good fortune, yes?
...the abscence of proof, is not proof...
It allows you to make a rational decision though. 100% lack of proof. Believe in it anyway or be rational?
Actually the truth is we were vomited by a star goat. Prove it is not true or accept this as true.
show me the proof that we were vomited by a star goat, then You will have the ability to change what I believe.
1000 years ago scientists could not prove that Love existed, today they can. Does that mean that love didnt exist 1000 years ago and it only came into existence once the proof existed? Obviously not. again, stating there is no proof...is not proof to the contrary.
You have chosen to believe that an abscence of proof proves you are correct, but it doesn't...sorry
all that proves is that there is no proof. In a situation where there is no proof, anything is possible. Even that possibly we are just vomit from a star goat. Which I don't believe is true.
1000 years ago there was rather a shortage of scientists.
Had any of them gotten together and tried it, they'd have had very little trouble showing love exists.
Same goes for any actual thing people at the time believed in.
Actually what I said was a little more complex than the snipet you chose to quote...
"1000 years ago scientists could not prove that Love existed, today they can. Does that mean that love didnt exist 1000 years ago and it only came into existence once the proof existed? Obviously not. again, stating there is no proof...is not proof to the contrary.
You have chosen to believe that an abscence of proof proves you are correct, but it doesn't...sorry
all that proves is that there is no proof. In a situation where there is no proof, anything is possible."
No it wasn't.
Scientists 1000 years ago did not lack the power to show love exists. It doesn't matter what follows, it's all based on a false premise.
ok lets go back 4000 years, the scientists of that era could not (did not have the ability to) prove the existence of Love...
Does that mean that love didn't exist before it was proven???????????
Sure they did. Or at least could have, were you able to find a scientist at the time.
But asking someone to prove the existence of love is rather like asking them to prove the existence of hair. It's so self-evident that you're going to be hard-pressed to find a scientist willing to waste their time on it.
But whether or not you can cite primary research indicating the existence of hair, there's plenty of evidence for its existence, and it's existence is accepted based on that evidence, not the mere theoretical possibility there is such a thing as hair.
Of course love existed before anyone proved it did, but like trees, rocks, and hair, people only came to believe in its existence once they had some evidence for it.
'some people' only believe after seeing proof, some probably believed from second hand accounts and feelings of intuition...
Maybe, but they wouldn't have kept on believing very long if something which should be so simple to detect never appeared.
We believe in rocks and trees and hair and love because we have personally experienced these things, not because we read about them in a holy-text or because we've got some misguided sense that a spirit has told us about them in a dream.
Scientists don't bother proving the existence of these things because most scientists would prefer not to make a mockery of themselves by proving things everyone already believes.
But the experiments are rather simple and you can perform them yourself if you have doubts.
If, for instance, rocks exist then I should be able to dig into the earth and find rocks.
If trees exist I should be able to go to a place which supports their growth and either has a relatively undisturbed ecosystem or has an ecosystem designed to be visually appealing to humans, and encounter trees.
If a person loves me I should be expect that person to take consideration for my well-being, want to spend time around me, listen to my concerns and offer advice.
...and so on.
God is the only thing a person can believe in without evidence without the people around them considering them mad.
Well then, I've got an invisible dragon in my garage.
What is all this shit about proof?
What proof ?
proof is a several edge weapon.
by means of rhetorics you can prove anything and it's contrary.
Proof is merely temporary.
Today's truth is yesterday's wrong and vice-versa.
You cannot prove anything in a lasting basis. It'll change tomorrow.
I do not believe that having faith as I do means I operate from a place of fear. I am not a Christian because I am afraid not to be a Christian. I have chosen my faith because when the options are laid out - Christianity makes the most sense to me, and abiding by the concepts of Christianity I am happiest with myself. My faith also has given me the courage to face what I fear the most.
Just my opinion, Holly
I know I am a free thinker, totally unique yet I repeat what has already been said in my own style.
Lets talk about this.
First, so that we understand each other, what is this god thing you speak of? I can't accept opinion or conjecture so try to offer a definition that "factually" defines it..ok? Then I'd love a friendly chat with you about "its" generic potential..sound good? Go for it. I'm gonna have a cuppa coffee..:-)
I don't ask for permission to think things are good or bad, I don't accept the musings of confused primitives as divine mandate, I haven't been trained to accept the desires of power-hungry mortals as the words of god, I can entertain hypothetical scenarios where my beliefs are wrong instead of just shouting "That's impossible, I know in my heart forever that I'm right."
That kinda thing in general.
all free thinking is is basing your personal belief system around logic and scientific thought instead of religion. one thing i have noticed about many (not all) Christian people is that they don't want to explore or examine any other ways of thinking but their own, or even different concepts or ways of living. that. to me, is based on fear.
A true christian like myself shrugs the idea of being ridiculed and belittled because of our religion. As a christian i can say that if people choose to be free thinkers or atheist, etc. then it is their right to do so. I don't agree with it but to fight against them is precisely against everything i believe in. You see God gave us all freedom to do whatever we choose in this life which means we have freedom of choice. It also talks about these very types of people (atheists, freethinkers) in the new testament so we already know to watch out for them so again i say as a christian let them see for themselves where their own religion will get them.
There ya go, quoting from the bible that those who don't believe are somehow inferior! What is inferior is believing in a sky fairy because you are scared of the words of a few psychotic old men who wrote a book of fear and hate to control the ignorant!
It got me just where I want to be!
I live my life based on my thoughts and ideas about the world not in fear of what will happen to me in the after-life. Does that answer your question? Or make any sense?
It makes more sense than a lot of the crap on these threads that atheists spew.
Thanks. I'm not an atheist. And while a lot of what atheists say makes a lot of sense to me, a lot of it is also uncalled for.
Though I didn't know you weren't an atheist, I didn't think you were. I would peg you more as a Buddhist, but that is just a guess.
Terribly sorry, SirDent. I apologize for myself for having introduced you to the real world. It may continue.
Free.."I can think whatever I want. I am free to interpret information at hand. I choose the one that best fits the evidence. If the evidence leans towards God, as a Higher power behind the evidence, I choose to "believe"."
Fear..."I can do the same as the free thinker, with one exception. I cannot interpret the data any other way but naturalistically, so I make up theories and fairy tales to(try and)explain it.
(strictly speaking, I wouldn't call it fear thinking though!)Just LIMITED!
Yes. I see the difference!
just like your post about having met God 30 years ago. you cannot interpret the data to others.
Limited by your hallucination.
Stories and fairy tales.
I was stupid once and believed all that evolution stuff.(interpreting the data)
Now I'm just REAL stupid, and believe the God stuff.(Another way to interpret the data)
But thank you for trying to be polite about it. (Hallucination?)
I'm not an Evolutionist.
and I never said you were stupid.
and I'm not trying to be polite.
I am polite!
just imagine what other people could say about it !
I think that makes my point quite well. Thanks.
One needs to be on a similar vibration to understand, relate and appreciate.
Is anyone really a free thinker???
This is just my opinion, but I think that We have all put limits on ourselves as to what is proof and what isn't. Our beliefs regardless of what they are; limits our thinking within the boundaries that we impose upon ourselves.
We are only as free as we think that we are.
And even that statement is limiting of itself.
I completely agree.
Whatever our we covertly impose boundaries on ourselves so our freedom of thought is relative to each individual.
I believe in God but if it was proven that He or any higher power DID NOT EXIST, minds would be changed. I'm a free thinker , but that's my opinion
where people give credit to god when they find gaps in their knowledge. Skeptical people(atheists/agnostics included) prefer to scrutinize but religious people end up only by attributing gap of knowledge to some god.
Really ? so sun was attributed as god by atheists ? do you want me to digg more examples ?
The seers are thinkers of the highest order.The minds of those for example who mapped the stars so accurately thousands of years ago were divine, extra ordinary.
The saints invented the sciences including astronomy.
Don't make me laugh on you mohit. Saints attributed earth as flat. and one of the famous disease as curse of god, remember "mata "disease in india ? your saints were calling them as curse of god till we got vaccines. now your saints are finding swine flu vaccine ?
and astronomy ? are you kidding me? if they were to invent astronomy how come they said earth is flat and tortured galileo and copernicus ? is that what you call freedom of speech and free thinking ?
Look up almanics for stars and you will find charts that were made thousands of years ago.Science has gradually uncovered what has been said in some of them as we needed instruments like the telescope to able to to do so and is unable to understand how they did in those times.
So you still support that statement don't you ? by theway, your god knowledge gave you exact estimate of how many solar systems are there in universe ? give me the number and way to validate it,if you can prove it with any saint texts.
I will give you another example .
The cow is considered as a holy animal because it is a sustainer of life, it provides nutrition,fuel and shelter.
This is why it is taken as divine as god as it sustains life .Similarly the wind rain, sun.
I don't know how many universe are there I have god knowledge to a certain extent but don't have all knowledge.
They have given us a lot of astronomy , the stars around us are charted with superb accuracy thousands of years ago.
Take your time to find that out mohit. The day you come up with empirical evidence of number of solar systems that you found with spirituality and [prophet/saint knowledge, and gave me method to check the validity of it. I'll join theism.
Till then what you preach will not make an inch effect on my skepticism, try you best.
I won't even do it. Man, the trouble I could start in here.
lollolol Having already laid out my view of the logical mind applied by all the great thinkers in here. I will refrain.
No I am not generalizing.
I am sure you all know who I am, and who I am not reffering too.
lolol I told you. It would be easy. Too easy.lol
How convenient isn't it ? i mean if it gets discovered in old age it gets in domain of saints/theism ?and you think current science is atheistic ?
You don't understand that science has nothing to do with theological stance. Theists take advantage of science to put grip on people using religion/politics. You think all those people who were exploring universe earlier were theist ? i pity your knowledge. they were skeptics(regardless of their theism or atheism).
Remember earth as flat argument ? you want me to dig medical science now ?
escapism at it's best. why you're not interested ? let me know it can you try to find that for me ? you knowing light can find that much faster isn't it ? Make use of your knowledge for others if you think you have it. I can put better challenge to you but solar systems challenge is enough one.
I am a Science graduate and I don't know how many solar systems are there in this universe, if you ever let me know I will become an atheist.
To search out how many solar systems are there, that would be very foolish on my path as I know god is infinite and this cosmos is gods extension.
Have more important work to do.
Are you kidding me ? celts and mayans were much earlier civilization and perished before vedas writing. So you mean they didn't know about science ? stop preahing vedas as pages of science.
what was there in rigveda ? brihaspati,indra and bagpiper whisky(aka somrus) isn't it ? you call that science of wine ?
LolDo you understand " Appeal to popularity" logical fallacy ?
I can give you more names of scientists who are skeptics/atheist/agnostic. Want to give this one shot ?
Lol, i pity your reasoning. Science will only know the number which we can possibly explore and the current known number is always shifting.
Can your god knowledge gives me exact number ? or you prefer to shift the burden of proof for your god knowledge ?
escaping again ? you have god knowledge right? so is it hard to find out simple answer to find out ? i mean you mock science over your spirituality, why don't you try and ask god the exact number ?
I am interested in uniting all religions a far more important task for me, this is a very strange request.
I said infinite.
I repeat many of the greatest scientists and mathematicians were believers with some dedicating their revelation of knowledge through god.Its a different medium of getting knowledge .
Albert Einstein was never really a theist, though. He liked to wax poetic about the universe and he used the word "god" a lot when he did. He wasn't a theist, and said on several occasions he found the idea of a personal god to be childish.
Someone of his intelligence should have known that theists, being so often unconcerned with the truth as they are, would later use those comments to misrepresent him and give false credence to their ideas.
But that just goes to show you, "Einstein said it," doesn't make it true.
He could see the intelligence required that created , organised and sustained this universe and marveled on it.Openly stating that even he was insignificant compared to such intelligence.
Look prove your intelligence rather than saying someone like Einstein should have had the intelligence like you have lot more and he was not intelligent.
Was he one of the greatest scientists ever.
He hated it when atheists misquoted him.So lets not speak in the name of science .
Even if this empty appeal to authority wasn't a logical fallacy, I still wouldn't need to prove my intelligence in relation to Einstein. He didn't believe in anything you would recognize as a god.
You need to prove it since you believe he was not intelligent enough as he is an acknowledged mind while you are not.
What does higher intelligence mean to you?
"In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views." Albert Einstein
No I don't, and for two reasons:
1) This is an appeal to authority. It doesn't really matter what Einstein believed. That fact that he was a supremely gifted physicist doesn't make him right about everything else in the world, or even everything in physics. He's famous, it doesn't make everything he ever said true.
The rational world doesn't work like Religion. Einstein is not Jesus or Mohammed, or Joseph Smith, we don't pretend he spoke with some divinity backing him up. He was just some guy. A very talented guy, but not fundamentally different from anyone else in the world. Einstein himself understood that, knew we would have no reason to simply accept the things he said because of who said them. That's why he did proper science, illustrated to the rest of the world why we should believe his ideas about relativity.
We don't put stock in his theories because it was Einstein who wrote them, we put stock in his theories because he supplied good, compelling reasons why we should think they are true.
Just going "Well Einstein said..." isn't good enough. Einstein himself certainly would never have accepted such a weak argument.
2) Einstein isn't on your side anyway. He didn't believe in a personal god. He believed there was a core set of operating principles for the universe. A single set of rules which governed all of matter, energy, and even time, and he considered these forces and an understanding of them to be God.
This was a god that could grant tremendous power and knowledge to its followers, but not a god that could be invoked, prayed to, or influenced by our desires. Prayer, meditation, supposedly revealed holy texts, all those things were useless for approaching Einstein's god, only mathematics and science had any hope of telling us anything about it.
Einstein's god was not at all similar to the god of any organized world religion.
It isn't scientists' beliefs, I quetion. But what the scientists believe. ie; Theories. Or their conclusions they base as fact on them.
no, just my own experience and observations. isn't that good enough?
what, the definition of "free thinkers"?
see, just like i said.
Einstein went to a catholic school and was indoctrinated with religion which he tried to relate to his science. Like many geniuses, Einstein was not terribly smart in some ways.
I think the attempts of defining Free and Fear at the beginning have lead to there being more confusion than is really necessary. This is my take on it:
Atheists refer to themselves as "Free Thinkers" like a name. A religious person will never be included in this. They refer to themselves as Free Thinkers because their actions aren't guided by what God says is right or wrong, where as a believer would perhaps refrain from a certain action purely because God says you shouldn't. An example: In the Torah it says you shouldn't mix milk and meat. There is no moral reason not to do this. The only reason a person would choose not to mix milk and meat is because it says so in the Torah and it is God's word.
I think you can be free and still come to the conclusion that God exists. We all have the ability to think of ourselves (being free) but that doesn't mean everyone will choose not to believe in God. Someone who blindly does what their parents/peers says and believes (or non-believes) because that's what they've been told to do is NOT free. Or at least, has not used their freedom. Does that makes sense. Different type of freedom to 'Free Thinkers' though.
No, I actually don't have a religion. I wrote a Hub about it. I just find it funny that you think I'm a Buddhist. I've read some books as Buddhism. But I've also been to an Episcopal, Catholic, and Baptist church, and go to Temple for bat/barmitzvah's in my family. Still no religion for me
My apologies. Are you Jewish by any chance? I only ask because you mentioned Bar/batmizvah's.
No apology necessary. I love that I have no religion. My boyfriend doesn't either. I'm not Jewish. But my grandmother and my father's side (but not him) of the family is. I also live in South Florida and have lots of Jewish friends. So I've been to quite a few bar/batmitzvahs and Jewish weddings
I have always wondered about Jewish weddings. I searched for them on the net, but you can't trust much of what you find. You wouldn't happen to know of a good site that shows the real Jewish wedding would you?
Umm not off hand, but I could look it up. What are you wondering about them?
I don't want to cause you nay trouble. I really would like to know everyhting about them. After the initial courtship I mean.
The ceremony and reception I would think. Maybe one of oyur friends would know of a good site. No big hurry either.
Is it warm in Florida this morning?
I mean here are some basics, but I'm not sure what you're looking for. I just Googled Jewish Weddings. http://www.myjewishlearning.com/life/Li … ding.shtml
Umm not so warm according to Florida standards. It is about 42 and raining.
I am leaving for a while so will see you later. I bookmarked the link so I can study it later. I may actually do a hub on it but not sure.
I need to have 2 questions answered before I can respond to this question.
1. What is this god thing? No opinion will be accepted.
2. What do ya mean by "free thinker?"
Once I get the answer to both of those questions, I'll be intellectually equipped to consider them and respond thoughtfully.
OK? go for it.
so you're only intellectually equipped, if one offers you a crutch?
I'm sorry! I didn't know you were lame
To the first question , I dunno.
What's this god thing, maybe it comes with misery and empoverishment (both material and intellectuel (spiritual?)). Like a buoy you can grab when you feel you're sinking.
It's due to a lack of education in a majority of cases.
hehehe (I'm talking like cagsil...)
A free thinker is an agnostic who possesses a level of education high enough to build his own conceptual system from thinkers he approves of and eventually make it evolve with his own contributions.
Generally the free thinker proves himself he is not too deviant from reason, by exposing his thoughts to others and finding exchange echos from them with proselytism excluded.
In other words, a free thinker is someone who believes what he wants with no dogma at the top.
By definition, he must be open minded, and accept other conceptual systems as if it were an excercice of logic permutation, provided it is intellectually rich enough.
I consider myself a 'free thinker' but I'm definately not Agnostic.
Free thinker? Oh you mean accepting one single solitary idea without proof? LOL
And rejecting all the others. I see what you mean. How free is that.
Again with the changing of my words...
No I don't mean---> "Oh you mean accepting one single solitary idea without proof?"
If I had meant that I would have said that. You want it to mean that, that is why YOU said that.
Lost me. You absolutely believe the god of the bible exists - despite the lack of proof. And are utterly closed to the possibility that you are wrong.
And this is free thinking? How exactly?
You wish I thought this way, but obviously I don't
---> "You absolutely believe the god of the bible exists - despite the lack of proof. And are utterly closed to the possibility that you are wrong."
The only thing I'm 'utterly closed' to is the acceptance of your unfounded beliefs, without the proof to make them 'founded beliefs'.
So being utterly closed to the possibility that the god of the bible does not exist is being "free thinking"?
Once again - I am not understanding this.
There is no proof that the easter bunny does not exist, so I take it you just believe everything unless proof against is provided.
Except the possibility that the god of the bible does not exist.
Is this the only thing you are closed to - Or do you make other exceptions?
I have actually seen the easter bunny.
And this is a fact.
But is it proof that it exists ?
The fact that I "see" with these eyes that will come back to the dust they came from, doesn't prove a thing.
Just energy waves exciting cells at the bottom of my retina
Again, as always, your writing something different, claiming that your 'new words' mean the same thing as the words that I wrote...which is incorrect. New words mean a different meaning...
What I am saying:
The abscense of proof, proves nothing except that there is no proof.
In a situation where there is no proof to the contrary, anything is possible.
If you wish to change my unfounded beliefs, You must provide proof that your beliefs are founded, (proven).
Show me the Proof.
If you believe in anything (except god) without proof, other people in general and society at large will regard you as misguided, at best.
The Flying Spaghetti Monster is good for a laugh and all, but if I consistently demonstrated a real belief in it the people around me would consider me quite mad.
Same goes for love. If you insist that some person loves you despite a persistent lack of evidence you will be regarded as dangerous, sick, or somewhere in between.
Well - I an confused once again. You are the one saying that there is absolutely a god are you not?
Show me the proof? Why do you always run away from the burden of proof? It is yours.
Yes - I agree anything is possible. Most of it is also unlikely.
We already agreed that there is an infinite number of possible gods. And as you cannot know (no proof) which one it is, this leaves an extremely low possibility that you are correct.
100% lack of proof of a god is good enough for me. Add to that the infinite number of possibles making yours all but impossible to exist and I am happy I made a rational, free thinking decision, although I am open to the possibility that one of these infinite number of possible gods exist. Any time he/she/it cares to show itself, I am all over it.
Still not understanding how dogmatically sticking with your argument is being a free thinker. Please explain.
Main Entry: free·think·er
: one who forms opinions on the basis of reason independently of authority; especially : one who doubts or denies religious dogma
http://hubpages.com/hub/Atheism-the-Rel … Non-Belief
I see. So your definition of "freethinking," applies.
Except when one becomes an atheist
Now here are some genuine definitions of the word. No wonder you and I never seem to communicate adequately - you are always making your own meanings up.
Freethought is a philosophical viewpoint that holds that beliefs should be formed on the basis of science, logic, and reason, and should not be influenced by authority, tradition, or any other dogma.
A person who has formed their opinions using reason and rational enquiry; somebody who has rejected dogma, especially with regard to religion.
Science. Logic. Reason.
Not "If you cannot prove it, it must be true and I will make up my own religion."
You really should consider using accepted meanings of words - it would make life a lot easier.
freethinker - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary:
Main Entry: free·think·er
: one who forms opinions on the basis of reason independently of authority; especially : one who doubts or denies religious dogma
I didn't make up the meaning... If you dont like the definition of the words, talk to the people that write the dictionaries...not my problem...
Reason. Sorry - I missed that word.
Perhaps. Or it could be the total and utter lack in your arguments.
Anything is possible.
You cannot be a free thinker if you are not agnostic.
Because if you are not agnostic, you must accept some starting dogma. (this is my starting dogma hehehe)
Can you be a thinker ?
So for you only Agnostics can be free thinkers ?
that's not a free thinker, thinking, I think
So, anybody is free thinker.
Maybe we shoud define the term "thinker"
I am associating this with education, instruction.
The more you have, the more you are "free" to pick what you want.
tantrum(a) Sorry, but I've exclude atheists and rationalists.
And I keep the choice.
why make it that difficult?
Free thinker: someone free to think ,and to come to his own conclusions, despite, society norms, background, knowledge, religion.
Accepting others thinking as well.
That's about what I said.
Excite me. I love it.
Qwark is right again; a diluted question will get a diluted answer in the best of cases.
thinking isnt free . it comes with a heavy cost. no wait, thats freedom . my bad
There must be a difference between "free" thinker and "rogue" thinker.
But there is something like "wild thinking".
Try to find a translation in your tongue of Claude Levy-Strauss's "La pensée sauvage".
It'll be good for you.
You may read it while sipping a Guiness pint, which is also good for you.
is your memory proof enough that you once had hair ?
A better question would be does a bald man living in some weird alternate world where no one has hair and no person has ever had hair believe in hair.
...yes, he believes in hair until we rearrange a hypothetical situation to the point where hair has stopped existing.
Oh ! I forgot to add in my definition of what is a free thinker,
that he must be a citizen from freedonia.
This is a mandatory condition.
I don't believe that belief or non belief in a god/deity/flying spaghetti monster has much to do with whether or not a person is or isn't a free thinker.
*How* they formed their beliefs can be a kind of a test of the level of their freedom though. The relevant question in is whether their belief or non belief is dependent on the beliefs of others. If they must scaffold their beliefs with the words and philosophies of others in order for them to be credible to themselves, then that's not freedom.
If, on the other hand, they draw a rational conclusion based on personal, albeit perhaps anecdotal evidence, then they are free thinkers in the metaphysical department.
I would venture though, that a free thinking believer in God's God could not be contained by any religion that wasn't agnostic at the core. So a free thinker is likely to lean towards either de facto agnosticism, atheism, Buddhism, or perhaps a west African or Hindu faith that renders any concept of God or spirits that we can possibly think of, inaccurate by default of our inability to abide in more than 3 dimensions.
So one would have to abandon any and all presumption of what God is, and admit that the only things we have to relate to it are woefully inadequate physical filters such as our minds and bodies. Even if exposed to this Force, the moment we attempted to open our mouths and explain our experiences, we would be lying...justifiably, because we would indeed be doing the best that we can, but still way off and nowhere near Absolute Truth.
A free thinking true atheist, by the same, cannot be the equivalent of a child clapping his hands over his ears and screaming. They must be rationally concluding that there is no God and no room to speculate on whether or not there is by virtue of sound conclusions based on knowledge and experience.
Since the existence of God can scientifically be neither proven nor disproven, all of our guesses are mere musings. I'd consider someone free who could admit to this, and stuck to the issue of whether or not the belief or disbelief does them any good.
It has done me a great deal of good to abandon the Santa Claus concept of God, and to pray only in gratitude or for forgiveness (which since I don't go for the Santa concept, does not mean accountability gets magically erased). I personally think belief in God, the way I believe, keeps me aware that I am not smarter than nature.
If someone could prove to me that there are only 3 dimensions, and that a 3 dimensional view of reality is the only valid one, I'm all ears. Until then, I'm cool with YWH in the non primitive sense, and I hope It's cool with me.
by Sophia Angelique4 years ago
Critical thinkers are in the minority these days. Between 1900 and about 1960, critical thinking was taught at schools so that people would reject magical thinking. During the past thirty or forty years, with the...
by Sophia Angelique4 years ago
Myers Briggs created the world's most famous industrial psychology test.Part of it is dividing people into thinkers and feelers.Loosely, thinkers base their decisions on what they think using factual information while...
by aka-dj5 years ago
I constantly see the accusation on this forum of believers not having the ability to think for themselves. IE Think freely.Does this imply, then, that ONLY non-believers, and atheists are the ONLY ones who are...
by Gaget Girl8 years ago
It started out innocently enough. I began to think at parties now and then to loosen up. Inevitably though, one thought led to another, and soon I was more than just a social thinker.I began to think alone - "to...
by betteryou7 years ago
I have found several interesting topics here in this forum and I'm actually surprised by comments from some Hubbers.... I saw these comments, "I do not believe that Mary or Jesus existed at all.", "the...
by cjhunsinger2 years ago
"Are atheists really so different from everyone else? Well, yes – but not in a bad way. Catherine Caldwell-Harris of Boston University has studied atheists and found that they share certain personality types,...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.