Fundamentalism versus Critical Thinking

Nobody can answer that question until you define what "real" is. What we are dealing with here is a trichotomy (at least).

1. Thinking critically to determine our own reality, or
2. Depending on the criticism of others to validate our reality, or
3. Rejecting any criticism of our received reality.

Depending on external criticism is no better than depending on external definition.
"I was only following orders" is no excuse.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

they are man-made concepts, everything about religion has to do with man, a being of infinite power would not allow people to enslave his children or let them murder each other or make laws allowing killing if you break a lawwhat you are arguing isn't really critical thinking, its more like you are arguing that because we don't know all possiblities that the ones we do know are irrelevent and we shouldn't trust themthe thing is all religions are made from our standpoint not gods, man worships gods, so yes not only are religions man-made but the concept of worshiping a higher being is purely a man-made concept, didn't your god create us to choose? well we don't have to believe in anything or anyone.. its a choice but theres nothing that shows any religion is right, all the books, beliefs and everything else doesn't show them right.

A good philosophy for living is 'real' in the sense that a good diet could be.It brings results,
it's sensible,
safe for the long-term,
flexible, well-rounded,
neither too lax, nor so strict that a person 'gives up',
it fits into your life-style and can be followed without the necessity of closeting oneself in a 'diet community'. Either way, there is no critical thinking.

I am not sure how a Being of Infinite Power's allowing us to do things proves that all religion is a man-made concept. I'll move on. No, I am arguing that critical thinking involves awareness of all possibilities, known or unknown. 'Choice' to worship by no means equals 'man-made'. If the concept of worshiping a higher being is man-made, the opposite would be that the concept of worshiping a higher power is God-made. After all, you did not create the choices that you have. You can worship, or not worship. By choosing not to worship, you did not create the concept of choice, and can not effect whether God exists. You can not 'uncreate' Him, anymore than a worshiper could 'create' Him.'Seek and ye shall find' does not mean 'seek and ye shall create' nor does it mean that in way you have created the concept of seeking or the object to be found.Any of the above could be true but it is not proven that they are true. It doesn't matter if something can be shown to be right...the topic is critical thinking, and that involves looking at the possibilities.Edited by anastasia, : No reason given.

That's the key, isn't it? The fundamentalist has to closet himself from the "real world" for his way of thinking to work.He can't look at rocks because they'll tell him how old the earth really is. He can't look at living things because they'll tell him that evolution really is a fact.If he eliminates the real world - or at least eliminates thinking about it - he can cling to his "precious".Then there are the anastasiists, who like to pretend that there is some woo-woo "reality" that is "just as real" even though it has no real symptoms.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

I vote also for the probability of a woo woo reality. I have experienced too much to ever think otherwise....Of course I am too stubborn to suspend my beliefs and critially investigate Would not a spiritual reality by definition be unmeasurable in an empirical sense?

A physically empirical sense, surely. But if there IS a woo-woo reality, it can only be detected by a woo-woo sense, which is likewise unmeasurable. That means, as you know, that there can be empirical evidence for the spritual, but only through an un-proven assumption that humans can detect the spiritual.

I've backtracked a fair way into this thread, and I got lost following the equivocation serpent biting his tail.This is the woo woo universe, the one I can see, touch, feel, taste, hear, smell, wonder at...and it's got all the woo woo I need.If it is empirical, not only can two people agree on its detection--so can instrumentation. Otherwise, empirical only means whatever any two madmen can agree they see.And that's not what it means.

---

Real things always push back.
-William James Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

If it's "unmeasurable", how can you assign a "probability"?Seems like you want to have your critical cake and eat it too. You want to (ab)use the terminology of thinking without investing the effort to do any. Sure, it might be all warm and fuzzy to believe you have The Answer™, but it can't be very satisifying in the long run. You can't really "know" anything until you've done your homework.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

I accept your technically-correctness.

Gosh...this really was a good topic. *sighs wistfully*

OK, without reading anything of this thread but the title:The absolute last thing fundamentalists want is critical thinking.Critical thinking and skepticism are no threat to anything in science, including the theory of evolution. If something changes, it changes for the better as new knowledge is acquired and old mistakes are discarded.But critical thinking and skepticism can be devastating to belief systems based on scripture and revelation. Two classic examples: the global flood and the idea of a young earth. Neither has survived the test of science, and fundamentalists can only put their fingers in their ears and try to avoid learning what the facts really are. That and dishonestly twisting and manipulating those facts until they conform with belief, as the creationists websites generally do.No, the absolute last thing fundamentalists want is critical thinking, especially when it is applied to their beliefs.Edited by Coyote, : spelling

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

I totally agree, from personal experience, 40 years ago I was what most would call a fundie, but after years of critical thinking I eventually, about 15 years ago, became an Atheist, much from studying the Bible as a free thinker.

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

Why an atheist? Whats so hard about believing in God? (Forget about scripture) I believe in neither of those things. Im just talking about belief that God exists or not. What would cause people to doubt the possibility?Edited by Phat, : added text

One word, Evidence! I've never come across any evidence for gods, fairies, ogres, IPUs, FSM, Santa Claus, etc. So I don't believe in any of these things. Why don't you believe in the Nordic gods? Why would you doubt the possibility that they exist?