Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh so now science can establish God exists? When did that happen? Give us a link to a journal article.
Don't be coy, Tzaph. The ONLY things science can establish is what EXISTS. In my view, everything that they establish exists about our reality is evidence of God, period. Those are the ONLY things we actually KNOW for sure about God. Everything else is human vanity, hubris, speculation, and mythos. I happen to have personal experiences that help me sort through the speculation and mythos to what is true about God based on my encounter. YMMV.
Still waiting Gaylen for your comments on the distinction between "critical thinking" what it is; and practical application, what it's used for.
I assume you are asking for a distinction between critical thinking and ordinary thinking? As with most things, I think the "critical" aspect of critical thinking is a matter of degree. Critical thinking tends to be more mindful of context, logical relations, evidence, and the need to question assumptions. Emotions and intuitions are essential to life, but when tackling important decisions, a critical attitude is beneficial. (BTW: "critical" in the context of critical thinking does not mean "negative" or "judgmental" in the sense of "looking down upon"; it essentially means questioning, as opposed to drifting along with minimal self reflection.) I thought I explained my view on critical thinking a few pages back when I listed criteria. I also think the QualiaSoup video gave a good basic explanation. As for practical application: Most realms of life could probably benefit from critical thinking, but actually applying it to most realms of life would be impractical. Intuitions and autopilot are ok for lots of things. I'd suggest critical thinking for any important decision.
Concerning this thread, I'd say that many aspects of spirituality don't require too much critical thinking. If something feels good, yields inspiration, and does no significant harm, there is not much need for extensive analysis. But if, like me, you love philosophy and/or science and you really want to understand how the worlds works, then critical thinking becomes like the painter's paint brush - virtually impossible to apply your art without it.
Last edited by Gaylenwoof; 02-03-2018 at 10:33 PM..
Don't be coy, Tzaph. The ONLY things science can establish is what EXISTS. In my view, everything that they establish exists about our reality is evidence of God, period. Those are the ONLY things we actually KNOW for sure about God. Everything else is human vanity, hubris, speculation, and mythos. I happen to have personal experiences that help me sort through the speculation and mythos to what is true about God based on my encounter. YMMV.
So then JC and the baseball fable are vanity and hubris.
Glad we got that straightened out.
Yes Gaylen is a great explainer. This post makes a clear distinction and shows how a "vision" can be separate and startlingly different from the "interpretation" a person gives it and even more changed (distorted) as other meanings get layered on top of it.
Sort of like the telephone game.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof
...But I think it would be foolish for anyone to simply accept your word on this unless, of course, they have a mystical experience of their own that leads them to the same conclusion. I don't see any scientific or logical reasons to accept your views about the role of Jesus.
I think I recall you saying that, after your experience, you searched around for a way to make sense of it, and you eventually settled on the Jesus narrative as the best fit. This suggests to me that the experience, in and of itself, did not come pre-packaged with any one particular necessary interpretation. Based on this, then, you ought to accept that other interpretations are logically possible, .....
Your experience does not, in itself, specify that Jesus is the perfect resonance with God, nor does it specify that Jesus is the only perfect resonance with God.
.....Anywayz, I am simply not convinced that Jesus is the perfect resonance, and even if he is, I'm not convinced that he is the only perfect one.
...one assumption in particular that I'd like to challenge is the idea that there is one-and-only-one perfect "wavelength" (so to speak) that counts as God's perfect consciousness....
.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 02-03-2018 at 10:46 PM..
I assume you are asking for a distinction between critical thinking and ordinary thinking? As with most things, I think the "critical" aspect of critical thinking is a matter of degree. Critical thinking tends to be more mindful of context, logical relations, evidence, and the need to question assumptions. Emotions and intuitions are essential to life, but when tackling important decisions, a critical attitude is beneficial. (BTW: "critical" in the context of critical thinking does not mean "negative" or "judgmental" in the sense of "looking down upon"; it essentially means questioning, as opposed to drifting along with minimal self-reflection.) I thought I explained my view on critical thinking a few pages back when I listed criteria. I also think the QualiaSoup video gave a good basic explanation. As for practical application: Most realms of life could probably benefit from critical thinking, but actually applying it to most realms of life would be impractical. Intuitions and autopilot are ok for lots of things. I'd suggest critical thinking for any important decision.
Concerning this thread, I'd say that many aspects of spirituality don't require too much critical thinking. If something feels good, yields inspiration, and does no significant harm, there is not much need for extensive analysis. But if, like me, you love philosophy and/or science and you really want to understand how the worlds works, then critical thinking becomes like the painter's paintbrush - virtually impossible to apply your art without it.
I assume you are asking for a distinction between critical thinking and ordinary thinking? As with most things, I think the "critical" aspect of critical thinking is a matter of degree. Critical thinking tends to be more mindful of context, logical relations, evidence, and the need to question assumptions. Emotions and intuitions are essential to life, but when tackling important decisions, a critical attitude is beneficial. (BTW: "critical" in the context of critical thinking does not mean "negative" or "judgmental" in the sense of "looking down upon"; it essentially means questioning, as opposed to drifting along with minimal self reflection.) I thought I explained my view on critical thinking a few pages back when I listed criteria. I also think the QualiaSoup video gave a good basic explanation. As for practical application: Most realms of life could probably benefit from critical thinking, but actually applying it to most realms of life would be impractical. Intuitions and autopilot are ok for lots of things. I'd suggest critical thinking for any important decision. (BTW: I wish people would always apply critical thinking when voting.)
Concerning this thread, I'd say that many aspects of spirituality don't require too much critical thinking. If something feels good, yields inspiration, and does no significant harm, there is not much need for extensive analysis. But if, like me, you love philosophy and/or science and you really want to understand how the worlds works, then critical thinking becomes like the painter's paint brush - virtually impossible to apply your art without it.
The distinction I am making is this. We both use critical thinking. But we don't engage in the same activities where we apply our critical thinking. For instance you debate I do not. I use critical thinking to understand a second century religious text you do not.
Thats what I'm getting at. Debate is not an aspect of what critical thinking is. It is a practical application of critical thinking.
Critical thinking is required for debate.
Debate is not required for critical thinking.
So I'm wondering about your perspective on this: Do Jim Jones and L. Ron Hubbard both have true beliefs about the nature of God and the role of humanity in the cosmos, etc.?
Which do you think is a better source of spiritual knowledge and inspiration: Jim Jones or the Dalai Lama? Or are both equally worthy of your admiration? What role, if any, should critical thinking play in deciding which of these religious leaders is the best source of spiritual knowledge and inspiration?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel
That question is best addressed by those who think along the lines of "all religion is false and irrational thinking." Or since its your set of questions go ahead and give it a try tell us your responses.
I'm trying to figure out how outlandishly ridiculous and/or dangerous a religious leader has to be before you simply admit that they're beliefs are wrong (factually wrong and/or morally wrong). And when you believe with high confidence that someone holds a significantly wrong belief, couldn't it be your responsibility to show them a better belief and explain why it is a better belief?
I'm trying to figure out how outlandishly ridiculous and/or dangerous a religious leader has to be before you simply admit that they're beliefs are wrong (factually wrong and/or morally wrong). And when you believe with high confidence that someone holds a significantly wrong belief, couldn't it be your responsibility to show them a better belief and explain why it is a better belief?
You ask good questions in the post shown below. I'd be interested in hearing your responses.
Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof
"So I'm wondering about your perspective on this: Do Jim Jones and L. Ron Hubbard both have true beliefs about the nature of God and the role of humanity in the cosmos, etc.?
"Which do you think is a better source of spiritual knowledge and inspiration: Jim Jones or the Dalai Lama? Or are both equally worthy of your admiration? What role, if any, should critical thinking play in deciding which of these religious leaders is the best source of spiritual knowledge and inspiration?"
I don't recall ever saying that "debate" - strictly speaking - is necessary for critical thinking, but a willingness to understand alternative perspectives definitely is an important aspect, and you are not really going to understand alternative perspectives if you refuse to listen to the people who are most knowledgeable about those perspectives. And when it comes to views that you don't like, the most knowledgeable people could be people who you don't like.
Suppose a professional movie reviewer is sure he will hate a movie, so he refused to watch it. Well, fine. But then he can't go on to pretend that his review of the movie is an expert analysis. All he can honestly say is "I don't actually know much about the movie because I never saw it." A critical thinker who refuses to expose himself to the best evidence and logical reasons in favor of theory X should not pretend that is view of theory X (or theory Not-X) is the product of critical thinking.
Theologians are among the world's leading experts on atheist viewpoints, and the leading atheists generally have vastly more insights into the Christian Bible than most Christians do. I've never said that critical thinking requires literal debate, as such, but it does require careful consideration of the best evidence and arguments for and against whatever view is being critically considered.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
