I'm quoting my rather profound (TIC) comment below from the GAFE thread. (page 35 I believe)
"Thinking for myself? I am intrigued by the number of people who reject the church, or their parent's ideas, and think they are becoming some kind of freethinking agent, when all they do is join the huge ranks of those who simply deny God and all He stands for. It is this path that is the wide one, crowded with unthinking followers."
Who here thinks their ideas are brand spankin' new? Independent of all who came before? A modern, newly intelligent insight into life that demonstrates a wisdom above all forebears (especially a fresh call to freedom from that ancient depository of indoctrination: the church)?
Originally posted by chinking58If your quoted idea is not brand spankin' new, why did you find it so profoundly quotable?
I'm quoting my rather profound (TIC) comment below from the GAFE thread. (page 35 I believe)
"Thinking for myself? I am intrigued by the number of people who reject the church, or their parent's ideas, and think they are becoming some kind of freethinking agent, when all they do is join the huge ranks of those who simply deny God and all He stands ...[text shortened]... (especially a fresh call to freedom from that ancient depository of indoctrination: the church)?
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesIt illustrates chinking58 premise that no ones ideas are brand spankin' new.
If your quoted idea is not brand spankin' new, why did you find it so profoundly quotable?
A common ad hominem is to accuse an opponent of "not thinking for himself." Usually this is total crap - and the person giving it can not think of a cogent counter argument.
It seems to me that if one develops all one's thoughts without considering the ideas of those that came before - not only would the vast majority of one's ideas be unoriginal - but most of them would be really bad . Thinking for yourself is like trying to fly a plane without taking lessons first.
"The brain is a terrible thing to waste." Read a book.
3 edits
Originally posted by chinking58The absurdity of that statement, coming for a person that thinks the ancient Israelites had a "brand spankin'.. " new idea and is a "unthinking follower" of that idea, is so obvious.
I'm quoting my rather profound (TIC) comment below from the GAFE thread. (page 35 I believe)
"Thinking for myself? I am intrigued by the number of people who reject the church, or their parent's ideas, and think they are becoming ...[text shortened]... eedom from that ancient depository of indoctrination: the church)?
Nobody thinks their ideas are without a foundation based on past ideas, but most don't toss out 2000 years of accumulated knowlege because there are stone-aged myths written about a stone-age god in a book they call holy. A god that wasn't an original , having been purloined from a more ancient civilization.
Originally posted by ColettiIt seems to me that if one develops all one's thoughts without considering the ideas of those that came before - not only would the vast majority of one's ideas be unoriginal - but most of them would be really bad . Thinking for yourself is like trying to fly a plane without taking lessons first....Read a book.
It illustrates chinking58 premise that no ones ideas are brand spankin' new.
A common ad hominem is to accuse an opponent of "not thinking for himself." Usually this is total crap - and the person giving it can not think of a cogent counter argument.
It seems to me that if one develops all one's thoughts without considering the ideas of those that ...[text shortened]... ne without taking lessons first.
"The brain is a terrible thing to waste." Read a book.
why do you need to read any books when you're already destined for greatness as one of the select few? i'm over my fascination with your world view coletti. it intrigued me for a while, but it has kicked me and all the rest of mankind one too many times in the balls. i'm done with entertaining your notions of how miserable and pathetic and small my capacities are as a human being. i'm done with it for many reasons. you can have your world view because i don't want it.
Originally posted by LemonJelloWow! Where did that come from? Was that in response to my post - or are you venting. I'm think people of many views could take the same position as I did regard "thinking for themselves." That was not a "coletti's worldview exclusive" position.
why do you need to read any books when you're already destined for greatness as one of the select few? i'm over my fascination with your world view coletti. it intrigued me for a while, but it has kicked me and all the rest of mankind one too many times in the balls. i'm done with entertaining your notions of how miserable and pathetic and small my ...[text shortened]... m done with it for many reasons. you can have your world view because i don't want it.
Many of the greatest minds did not get where they are by re-inventing the wheel - they read, adopted, and refined the ideas and concepts of others that came before them. Do you disagree?
Originally posted by ColettiExactly my point!
It illustrates chinking58 premise that no ones ideas are brand spankin' new.
A common ad hominem is to accuse an opponent of "not thinking for himself." Usually this is total crap - and the person giving it can not think of a cogent counter argument.
It seems to me that if one develops all one's thoughts without considering the ideas of those that ...[text shortened]... ne without taking lessons first.
"The brain is a terrible thing to waste." Read a book.
Originally posted by ColettiDoes this leave me free to refine the ideas and concepts I find in the Bible? 'Cause if anything could use some refining...
Many of the greatest minds did not get where they are by re-inventing the wheel - they read, adopted, and refined the ideas and concepts of others that came before them. Do you disagree?
TheSkipper
Originally posted by TheSkipperSort of - depending on your view of scripture. If you do not believe it is the inerrant Word of God - then you would be free to refine any ideas you find. But if you believe the bible is God's inerrant Word - then you still need to interpret what the ideas and concepts that are to be found therein. Either way - you are basing your ideas and concepts on some external source - and not simply coming up with new ideas on you own.
Does this leave me free to refine the ideas and concepts I find in the Bible? 'Cause if anything could use some refining...
TheSkipper
1 edit
Originally posted by ColettiSo, who was the last of the original thinkers?
Sort of - depending on your view of scripture. If you do not believe it is the inerrant Word of God - then you would be free to refine any ideas you find. But if you believe the bible is God's inerrant Word - then you still need to inter ...[text shortened]... ernal source - and not simply coming up with new ideas on you own.
EDIT Adam?
Or Eve?
1 edit
Originally posted by chinking58Or, what about a kid who wants to "think for herself" and becomes a Goth and looks acts and dresses like all the other Goths?
I'm quoting my rather profound (TIC) comment below from the GAFE thread. (page 35 I believe)
"Thinking for myself? I am intrigued by the number of people who reject the church, or their parent's ideas, and think they are becoming ...[text shortened]... eedom from that ancient depository of indoctrination: the church)?
Sometimes, it all depends on your point of view.
Just because one wishes to break free of something he finds stale doesn't demand a solitary existance to realize that wish.
EDIT: 5 marks off myself; the last sentence sucks.