Mostly when there is debate on religion and secularism the later (i.e secular proponents) tends to lay claim of free thinking and thus must either lead to disblieve in God. now i often ask my self severally does believe in God limits the usage of my free thought?


When in reality no one ever question my ability to implore my critical free thought when dealing with decisions that involve saving lives or money.

Does the ability of usage of free thought cannot be interpolate from real life to believe in God?

Does believe in God only criterion and parameter in determining the usage of free thought.

Why cant my free thought leads me to believe in God?

Present you view/s using your free thought only

Rhino:

Bro, your meaning above is not really clear. Try simplify it or ask direct questions

Given Nature >>> An omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent entity follows >>> creation ex nihilo can't be a chance occurence

that is what critical inquiry >>> tells me >>> to be continued

@ nuclear boy.

Why must it be that whenever you said there is God you will be accuse of not properly using your free thinking ability?

Must conclusion of there is no God be at the apex of free/critical thinking? Why not otherwise?

cant i arrive at God with my critical and free thinking ability? Why must it be perceive otherwise?

Believing in a creator does not negate freethinking, buddy. But freethinking does reject, in all their ramifications, the shackles of religious dogmas. These things get mixed up during debates. I am a freethinker who believes in the existence of a creator of the universe, but who does not allow himself to be entrapped in manmade religious dogmas in the guise of mainstream religions. And therein lies the difference. A freethinker should never allow anybody else to dictate to him or her what to think or not to think about any issue. That is what freethinking means. It is the inelianable right of every human being to be able to think freely.

Rhino.4dm:

Why must it be that whenever you said there is God you will be accuse of not properly using your free thinking ability?

Must conclusion of there is no God be at the apex of free/critical thinking? Why not otherwise?

cant i arrive at God with my critical and free thinking ability? Why must it be perceive otherwise?

Jenwitemi:

Believing in a creator does not negate freethinking, buddy. But freethinking does reject, in all their ramifications, the shackles of religious dogmas. These things get mixed up during debates. I am a freethinker who believes in the existence of a creator of the universe, but who does not allow himself to be entrapped in manmade religious dogmas in the guise of mainstream religions. And therein lies the difference. A freethinker should never allow anybody else to dictate to him or her what to think or not to think about any issue. That is what freethinking means. It is the inelianable right of every human being to be able to think freely.

Deist

Feel free to label me with whatever. I do not label myself in any way. Labels are unimportant.

Uyi Iredia:

Deist

kk >>> i catch ur drift >>> the feeling is mutual

Rhino.4dm:

@ nuclear boy.

Why must it be that whenever you said there is God you will be accuse of not properly using your free thinking ability?

I think it's because the word "God" is deeply associated with religions which of course come from other people.

Rhino.4dm:

Must conclusion of there is no God be at the apex of free/critical thinking?

I think it is the final conclusion of critical thinking.

Rhino.4dm:

Why not otherwise?

I think it's because including God as it is described in various religions is simply an unsatisfactory answer in the light of current knowledge to the numerous questions raised by human existence.

Rhino.4dm:

cant i arrive at God with my critical and free thinking ability? Why must it be perceive otherwise?

I don't think so. If you do, then I doubt that it's the same type of God as described in religious books.

Another important consideration about free thinking is that it requires asking of questions. Lots of questions. Difficult questions. Even questions that may be considered taboo in some societies.

A criminal thinks he's free to kill fellow humans and plunder others for whatever reason. Is this free thinking?

Free thinking is simply thinking for yourself. It doesn't have to be smart or critical or anything. It merely has to be original and not recycled or even influenced. So not all thinking can lead to the same conclusions as far as God is concerned. It's like having three numbers in a series, depending on how your thinking process plays, you can have several suitable numbers for the 4th, 5th, 6th etc numbers in the series. No belief system is better than the other. Some are merely grander, more convoluted or ridiculous than the others. Lol.

Image123:

A criminal thinks he's free to kill fellow humans and plunder others for whatever reason. Is this free thinking?

This is a joke right? This cannot be real.It must be a joke. . .DO PEOPLE ACTUALLY REASON AND TALK LIKE THIS?

My goodness. What kind of retards do we have walking the streets?

LOL!LOL!

harakiri:

This is a joke right? This cannot be real.It must be a joke. . .DO PEOPLE ACTUALLY REASON AND TALK LIKE THIS?

My goodness. What kind of retards do we have walking the streets?

harakiri:

This is a joke right? This cannot be real.It must be a joke. . .DO PEOPLE ACTUALLY REASON AND TALK LIKE THIS?

My goodness. What kind of retards do we have walking the streets?

and you sit like the simpleton >>> hiding in the darkness of ignorance >>> parading yourself fausse lumière >>> a schmuck reminder that people unfit to be called humans engage in mental ma$turbation >>> the anathema of the code of honor that your profile name connotes

it would be wise, of course, if you note the hidden wisdom in what Image 123 posted

this is an enviable environment for people of religious/irreligious leanings to discourse and learn on what free thinking is >>> i do not agree that religions are dogmatic per se >>> free-thinking could possibly as dogmatic as religions are acclaimed to be >>> Rhino's questions connote a meme that is quite popular >>> that atheism or agnosticism is synonymous with free-thinking >>> homer, as it were, has 'caught the bug'

a couple of questions >>> must one think ?  >>> as it were ? >>> and we aren't just talking about thinking >>> logical thinking of order attributed
to philosophers >>> must free-thinking arrive at an absolute truth ? >>> one which is universally accepted ? >>> doesn't it cease to become free-thought in so doing ?

>>> i used to be averse to Kierkegaard's notion >>> but of recent i realize that he was right in positing that truth is subjective >>> we ultimately measure the kind of truth we subscribe to >>> in light of this I decided that : Truth is absolutely relative and relatively absolute

*i won't attribute this quote to me because i am not sure whether this is a vague remembrance from a piece* It is absolutely relative because it is impossible to know all things >>> Knowledge is an infinite attribute >>> this is proven by the fact that there is always new knowledge to gain about the simplest of concepts/postulates/qustios e.g man, 1+1=2, what is evil ? >>> it is relatively absolute because inspite of the fact that there will always be knowledge we don't know >>> we are certain of knowledge we have

Insofar as we can never have absolute knowledge of reality >>> then free-thinking will always be limited   

Rhino.4dm:

Mostly when there is debate on religion and secularism the later (i.e secular proponents) tends to lay claim of free thinking and thus must either lead to disblieve in God.  now i often ask my self severally does believe in God  limits the usage of my free thought?


When in reality no one ever question my ability to implore my critical free thought when dealing with decisions that involve saving lives or money.

Does the ability of usage of free thought cannot be interpolate from real life to believe in God?*1

Does believe in God only criterion and parameter in determining the usage of free thought.*2

Why cant my free thought leads me to believe in God?*3

Present you view/s  using your free thought only

*1 >>> It can >>> if it is't then it would be 'slave thought'

*2 >>>  no >>> it isn't

*3 >>> there are religious fundamentalists who are I opine broad-minded >>> examples in past history include Gandhi, Saladin, Alfred the Great, Shakespeare, Spinoza et al >>> Spinoza wasn't a fundamentalist; however, he was a Christian. A glance at his correspondences would concrete this.

Uyi Iredia:

this is an enviable environment for people of religious/irreligious leanings to discourse and learn on what free thinking is >>> i do not agree that religions are dogmatic per se >>> free-thinking could possibly as dogmatic as religions are acclaimed to be >>> Rhino's questions connote a meme that is quite popular >>> that atheism or agnosticism is synonymous with free-thinking >>> homer, as it were, has 'caught the bug'

What bug? Note that I never implied that they were synonyms but that one generally leads to the other.

Uyi Iredia:

a couple of questions >>> must one think ?  >>> as it were ? >>> and we aren't just talking about thinking >>> logical thinking of order attributed
to philosophers >>> must free-thinking arrive at an absolute truth ? >>> one which is universally accepted ? >>> doesn't it cease to become free-thought in so doing ?

Thinking is one of the major distinguishing factor of humans so in a simple answer, yes, one must think.

Uyi Iredia:

>>> i used to be averse to Kierkegaard's notion >>> but of recent i realize that he was right in positing that truth is subjective >>> we ultimately measure the kind of truth we subscribe to >>> in light of this I decided that : Truth is absolutely relative and relatively absolute

Truth is relative? Do you really want to factually go down this route?

Uyi Iredia:

*i won't attribute this quote to me because i am not sure whether this is a vague remembrance from a piece* It is absolutely relative because it is impossible to know all things >>> Knowledge is an infinite attribute >>> this is proven by the fact that there is always new knowledge to gain about the simplest of concepts/postulates/qustios e.g man, 1+1=2, what is evil ? >>> it is relatively absolute because inspite of the fact that there will always be knowledge we don't know >>> we are certain of knowledge we have

. . .

One doesn't need to know all things to be sure of certain facts.

find out why Nigerians should leave Juju alone -- www.thenigerianarchive.

thehomer:

What bug? Note that I never implied that they were synonyms but that one generally leads to the other.

Thinking is one of the major distinguishing factor of humans so in a simple answer, yes, one must think.

Truth is relative? Do you really want to factually go down this route?

One doesn't need to know all things to be sure of certain facts.

*1 >>> which is precisely why I stated that you had caught the bug >>> so you opine that the hallmark of free-thought is atheism ? >>> that's a rather stilted axiom

*2 >>> ipso facto free-thinking is not absolutely free in nature >>> so it is a 'must' to think >>> it so concludes the fact that 'free-thought' has its limits

*3 >>> i already have >>> if you demur >>> give your grounds

*4 >>> i said that here

it is relatively absolute because inspite of the fact that there will always be knowledge we don't know >>> we are certain of knowledge we have

howbeit >>> the fact that what (the knowledge) we don't know could abnegate what we know >>> i dub our present knowledge (or 'truth') a relative absolute >>>  it is a certainty that is (relatively) open to uncertainty because of other certainties we don't know of >>> put in another way: Our 'knowledge' is always open (with respect) to uncertainties >>> i hope this concludes it

does free thinking mean you should let your mind roam about wildly and get lost?

Image123:

A criminal thinks he's free to kill fellow humans and plunder others for whatever reason. Is this free thinking?

Spot on. That is what they call free thinking.

[img width=500 height=500]http://www.answersingenesis.org/assets/images/media/cartoons/after-eden/20100326.gif[/img]

No. It simply means you have freedom of thought and contemplation without some dubious clergyman putting you in a mental straitjacket and hindering your ability to deeply contemplate and meditate on vast arrays of issues. Freedom of thought is the Godgiven right of every sentient being that sinister control freaks would like to take away from us under the guise of religion. By the way, you can get lost in a mental straitjacket too if you submit your Godgiven gift of freedom of thought to any tom dick and harry that comes along who selfproclaim as man of God in order to dazzle you into submission.

cogicero:

does free thinking mean you should let your mind roam about wildly and get lost?

Jenwitemi:

No. It simply means you have freedom of thought and contemplation without some dubious clergyman putting you in a mental straitjacket and hindering your ability to deeply contemplate and meditate on vast arrays of issues. Freedom of thought is the Godgiven right of every sentient being that sinister control freaks would like to take away from us under the guise of religion. By the way, you can get lost in a mental straitjacket too if you submit your Godgiven gift of freedom of thought to any tom manliness and harry that comes along who selfproclaim as man of God in order to dazzle you into submission.

according to the newest addition of the October 2010 edition of the DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) freethinking a.k.a oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) is a mental illness.

"The DSM-IV is the manual used by psychiatrists to diagnose mental illnesses and, with each new edition, there are scores of new mental illnesses. "

"Symptoms include questioning authority, negativity, defiance, argumentativeness, and being easily annoyed."

http://offthegridnews.com/2010/10/08/is-free-thinking-a-mental-illness/

Is nonconformity and freethinking a mental illness?  According to the newest addition of the DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders), it certainly is.  The manual identifies a new mental illness called “oppositional defiant disorder” or ODD.  Defined as an “ongoing pattern of disobedient, hostile and defiant behavior,” symptoms include questioning authority, negativity, defiance, argumentativeness, and being easily annoyed.

The DSM-IV is the manual used by psychiatrists to diagnose mental illnesses and, with each new edition, there are scores of new mental illnesses.  Are we becoming sicker?  Is it getting harder to be mentally healthy?

New mental illnesses identified by the DSM-IV include arrogance, narcissism, above-average creativity, cynicism, and antisocial behavior.  In the past, these were called “personality traits,” but now they’re diseases.

And there are treatments available.

"And there are treatments available."

So, being mentally boxed in and herded like a cattle is not a disease, right? What a moronic article made specially fby morons for morons.

cogicero:

according to the newest addition of the October 2010 edition of the DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) freethinking a.k.a oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) is a mental illness.

"The DSM-IV is the manual used by psychiatrists to diagnose mental illnesses and, with each new edition, there are scores of new mental illnesses. "

"Symptoms include questioning authority, negativity, defiance, argumentativeness, and being easily annoyed."

http://offthegridnews.com/2010/10/08/is-free-thinking-a-mental-illness/

"And there are treatments available."

Jenwitemi:

So, being mentally boxed in and herded like a cattle is not a disease, right? What a moronic article made specially fby morons for morons.

"Symptoms (of freethinking a.k.a oppositional defiant disorder (ODD)) include questioning authority, negativity, defiance, argumentativeness, and being easily annoyed."

[list]
[li]questioning international medical authority[/li]
[li]negativity[/li]
[li]defiance of peer-reviewed medical research and evaluation[/li]
[li]argumentativeness without any valid stance[/li]
[li]being easily annoyed[/li]
[/list]

bravo

"And there are treatments available."

Uyi Iredia:


*1 >>> which is precisely why I stated that you had caught the bug >>> so you opine that the hallmark of free-thought is atheism ? >>> that's a rather stilted axiom

I never said it was the hallmark I said free-thought generally leads to atheism.

Uyi Iredia:

*2 >>> ipso facto free-thinking is not absolutely free in nature >>> so it is a 'must' to think >>> it so concludes the fact that 'free-thought' has its limits

You are attempting to conflate freedom with a necessity of function.
e.g, do you think one's heart is free not to pump blood while said person is running?

Uyi Iredia:

*3 >>> i already have >>> if you demur >>> give your grounds

Ok. I say the sun is larger than the moon. Another person says the moon is larger than the sun. Are both of these statements true?

Uyi Iredia:

*4 >>> i said that here

howbeit >>> the fact that what (the knowledge) we don't know could abnegate what we know >>> i dub our present knowledge (or 'truth') a relative absolute >>>  it is a certainty that is (relatively) open to uncertainty because of other certainties we don't know of >>> put in another way: Our 'knowledge' is always open (with respect) to uncertainties >>> i hope this concludes it

What do you actually mean when you say truth is relative?

This ought to be interesting. I'll even count the number of times gunwielders will shoot their own feet

@ OLAADEGBU

Back with your cartoons?

thehomer:

@ OLAADEGBU

Back with your cartoons?

Did anybody say cartoons? 

Free Thinking means Independent Thinking.

[img width=500 height=500]http://www.answersingenesis.org/assets/images/media/cartoons/after-eden/20020225.gif[/img]

O.D.D must be an odd disease. Jesus can cure it.

thehomer:

I never said it was the hallmark I said free-thought generally leads to atheism.*1

You are attempting to conflate freedom with a necessity of function.
e.g, do you think one's heart is free not to pump blood while said person is running?*2

Ok. I say the sun is larger than the moon. Another person says the moon is larger than the sun. Are both of these statements true?*3

What do you actually mean when you say truth is relative?*4

*1 >>> you said this: "I think it is the final conclusion of critical thinking."

*2 >>> yes, it is >>> i would say that necessity of function does restrict freedom and thus, free-thinking.

*3 >>> yes, the were *i'm thinking Ptolemy and Copernicus, and the famed lady, Hypatia, who advanced Ptolemic models of the universe* >>> before the space age settled things of course

*4 >>> people can see a fact, know an axiom and conclude different things from it >>> people do not open up their beliefs/creeds/philosophy to falsifiability they open it up to verifiability >>> this cartoon by OLAADEGBU should give you the picture

[center]
[/center][center]

[/center]

>>> i used to be averse to Kierkegaard's notion >>> but of recent i realize that he was right in positing that truth is subjective >>> we ultimately measure the kind of truth we subscribe to >>> in light of this I decided that : Truth is absolutely relative and relatively absolute

Subjective truth? You will definitely have the risk of running into contradictions! Reality dwells on in the comfort of objectivity.

Freethinking in relation to religion, is obscured and discouraged. Dogma has already laid the system of beliefs.

Uyi Iredia:

*1 >>> you said this: "I think it is the final conclusion of critical thinking."

A hallmark is not necessarily a conclusion it's a distinguishing feature.

Uyi Iredia:

*2 >>> yes, it is >>> i would say that necessity of function does restrict freedom and thus, free-thinking.

Ok. So do you think humans have freewill?

Uyi Iredia:

*3 >>> yes, the were *i'm thinking Ptolemy and Copernicus, and the famed lady, Hypatia, who advanced Ptolemic models of the universe* >>> before the space age settled things of course

It seems you are attempting to shift focus by introducing some unnecessary details. Here is a direct question.

Which of these statements is/are true. You may pick more than one option.

A) The moon is larger than the sun.
B) The sun is larger than the moon.
C) Both objects are the same size.

Uyi Iredia:

*4 >>> people can see a fact, know an axiom and conclude different things from it >>> people do not open up their beliefs/creeds/philosophy to falsifiability they open it up to verifiability >>> this cartoon by OLAADEGBU should give you the picture

Believing something does not make it true.