Posted on 10/12/2016 8:03:12 AM PDT by heterosupremacist
National Freethought Day is observed annually on October 12. The purpose of National Freethought Day is to encourage people to be free thinkers and to base opinions on facts, science, logic and reason.
This day occurs on the anniversary of the effective end of the Salem Witch trials on October 12, 1692. On this day, Massachusetts Governor William Phips wrote a letter condemning the use of spectral evidence against the accused.
At some point, the trials did resume and “spectral evidence” was allowed but largely discounted and those convicted were swiftly pardoned by Phips.
if we are to base our thoughts on science logic and reason then are they truly FREE THOUGHTS ???
Wouldn’t that mean the thoughts were tied to some thing?
Joyous ‘National Gumbo Day!’
Re : Post #2 ~
*if we are to base our thoughts on science logic and reason then are they truly FREE THOUGHTS ???
Wouldn’t that mean the thoughts were tied to some thing?*
That’s the spirit! You are thinking freely!
Free thought. An oxymoron.
I had such high hopes for the Enlightenment.
Thinking that is not critical is a waste of time.
Similarly: Does Truth set free or oppress? Is knowing that 2+2=4 a burden or a tool?
Care is necessary because any proposition can be seen as limiting, even this one. If someone says, “There is no truth,” you could respond, “Is that true?” At which point all that's left is to wordlessly leave the conversation and get a drink.
But if one says, “There is Truth,” there are some things that are true,” the implication is that there are things to which we must accommodate ourselves.
...
This seems reasonable to me, a Catholic theist with a Scholastic bent. One the one hand, Reason (understood in all its richness and fullness, not as merely a sort of computing capacity) seems to reach, albeit falteringly, to the heights and depths. On the other, I am clearly temporal, my time is limited and, indeed, running out. And I am obviously imperfect, jangling and clinking, full of errors both intellectual and moral.
So it would seem that such freedom as might be available to me is necessarily circumscribed. It is the freedom of the sonnet, not of incoherent babble.
...
If this seems all high-falutin’ and airy-fairy, consider this:
Currently loud voices say that my nature is my choice, though the choice they speak of seems to be driven by passion rather than will. If I feel myself to be of some sexual classification which does not comport with my body, very well. I am that, and the disjunction between inclination and body is not an affliction (except maybe socially) but the way things are, good because it is mine.
Others would say that there is a human nature which is “given.” Unlike other animals I can choose to live in accordance with it or not. But my best shot at life is to know my nature and to live in accordance with it, as best I can.
So ... to cut to the chase, when we say “free thought,” we should spend some time thinking (freely, to be sure) about what freedom is.
I’m glad those thoughts were free. Fried shrimp at Walmart is not free.
I would like a penny for each one of my thoughts.
Wait!
I paid a lot for those thoughts!
And they’re crunchier than fried shrimp.
I find it ironic that this day would fall on Columbus Day. Columbus accidentally discovered the new world by following the logic that he was headed for China. So much for logic and reason.
Buy low, sell high. Walmart was out of fried shrimp; too bad for Tom the Son.
Free thinking is a legal philosophy term, not a literal term. All thoughts are references to something else. There's no such thing as a single thought out standing in its field alone.
Free thinking means freedom from legal persecution for your thoughts. Free thinking is what the Left is trying to destroy with hate crime legislation and political correctness. An example of its use is what is done to climate change "deniers." Free thinking protects against left wing mass murder - historically proven over and over again.
When logic and reason return an irrational conclusion, is it logical and reasonable to simply accept it? Or is it logical and reasonable to reject it for its irrationality?
Why do you believe Columbus discovered the New World accidentally? Because some hack described it that way in a book? Because the political climate supports the hack? Because some corrupt school board insists on it?
Every time you accept an irrational conclusion, you decrease your analytical abilities by that much. The difference between genius and commonality isn't intelligence - it's the courage to acknowledge to yourself that things don't add up, and somewhere, somehow, there's a better answer that's still hidden from sight.
As Sherlock Holmes said, "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
Specifically, therefore, if it is illogical and unreasonable that Columbus accidentally discovered the New World... then that's not how it happened.
Wow, calm down, there’s a lot of overlay there that doesn’t even remotely describe my beliefs. But it remains true that Columbus set out for the East Indies, not the West Indies. Beyond that, everything you’ve ascribed to my belief structure is entirely fictitious, it may well describe some other person, but not me. Another irony of Logic Day, I guess.
Nothing to calm down, I wasn’t remotely addressing your beliefs. I was reflecting on the nature of the subject.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.