Organized Religion and thinking-for-yourself

[JetLeg]

Ok, what do you think about the following argument :


The difference between being a part of an organized religion or not is very much a question of thinking-for-yourself, or not doing that.


There are three different reasons why you cannot rationally argue for or against thinking-for-yourself :

(1) Thinking for yourself (or not) is a personal choice. Therefore, it does not have anything to do with truth or validity - it simply is a matter of choice.



(2) Thinking for yourself (or not) is also a value, to which you choose to subscribe, or you don't.

You cannot prove objectively via expirementing that one value is better than another. Therefore you cannot prove that thinking-for-yourself is better than not doing it.


(3) Thinking for yourself (or not) is a value, to which you choose to subscribe, or you don't.

Values cannot be found in the physical, objective universe. Therefore they are subjective. Therefore they are relative. Therefore you cannot prove that thinking-for-yourself is better than not doing it.

[Hokulele]

Myself, I think that this particular thread will go nowhere.

[JetLeg]

Myself, I think that this particular thread will go nowhere.

Any thoughts on the argument?

[Rasmus]

Any thoughts on the argument?

I don't think that thinking about this myself has any value ...

[jond]

JetLeg: What is it you want? Why are you on a skeptic board posting this nonsense? Seriously, are you that unsure about your belief in HH the DL that you need to find confirmation here??? Grow up and either abandon your foolish beliefs, or accept them and shut up about them already.

[JetLeg]

JetLeg: What is it you want? Why are you on a skeptic board posting this nonsense? Seriously, are you that unsure about your belief in HH the DL that you need to find confirmation here??? Grow up and either abandon your foolish beliefs, or accept them and shut up about them already.

Anyway, what is the problem with the argument?

[SomeGuy]

Anyway, what is the problem with the argument?

The lack of coherence and a pointe...

[Lothian]

I am thinking about deciding whether I want to think about the choice between thinking and not thinking about your arguments.

[wollery]

I'll give you a hypothetical to test your "argument".

You move to a new neighbourhood and find yourself a nice new church to attend. It seems just like any other church you've been to. After a month you're told that it's time for your official welcoming ceremony, and that it will take place at a local beauty spot. So, you duly arrive at the allotted time and place, a high cliff overlooking a lovely bay. When everyone is gathered you are told that the welcoming ceremony involves an act of trust, that you must leap off the cliff, but don't worry, you will be caught. Nobody will explain how you will be caught, they just repeat that you will.

So, thinking-for-yourself, or not-thinking-for-yourself. Which is preferable in this situation?


ETA - You know, it's a shame I'm so nice, or I'd probably be up for a pith award in the near future, for the response I didn't post!

[KingMerv00]

Thinking for yourself is a good thing. Don't question why, just know that I am right.

[jond]

Anyway, what is the problem with the argument?

Kool-aid. We've been through this before.

[Apathia]

:lol2:

The laughing redhead loves you, JetLeg.
Great trolling! And using the same old net with new tangles in it.

[Cuddles]

(1) Thinking for yourself (or not) is a personal choice. Therefore, it does not have anything to do with truth or validity - it simply is a matter of choice.

Sticking your head in a fire is a personal choice. Therefore it does not have anything to do with truth or validity - it simply is a matter of choice.

(2) Thinking for yourself (or not) is also a value, to which you choose to subscribe, or you don't.

You cannot prove objectively via expirementing that one value is better than another. Therefore you cannot prove that thinking-for-yourself is better than not doing it.

You cannot prove objectively via experimenting that sticking your head in a fire is better than not sticking your head in a fire. Therefore you cannot prove that sticking your head in a fire is better than not doing it.

(3) Thinking for yourself (or not) is a value, to which you choose to subscribe, or you don't.

Values cannot be found in the physical, objective universe. Therefore they are subjective. Therefore they are relative. Therefore you cannot prove that thinking-for-yourself is better than not doing it.

Can you guess where this is going?

[bokonon]

What's HH the DL? Humbert Humbert the Dalai Lama?

[jond]

What's HH the DL? Humbert Humbert the Dalai Lama?

Humbert Humbert, His Holiness. Yeah, that's the one...

[That_guy]

Wollery said it all. I think that's pretty conclusive.