Thoughts about Thinking.

Sometimes it is impossible to make a decision on a matter simply because we don't have access to all the facts.  In my opinion, it is unwise to make a decision when this happens.  This is, essentially, what an agnostic is.

Life is all about making decisions.  In Australia we have the ability to vote for particular political parties.  If we are going to vote we should be informed about the diversity of policy between those political parties.  Many of us choose a partner we would like to spend a lot of time with.  In this case it is important to know about the person before we settle down with them.  Everyday we have to make less critical decisions like food products, choice of insurers, internet service providers and many other smaller decisions.

Unfortunately, we make many decisions based on what is called intuition.  Because people place human intuition high on the list of human faculties, it is often allowed to replace careful thinking.  Advertising claims that tout a 90% fat free product often manoeuvres the thinking of a buyer to disregard the obvious reality that there is 10% fat, a relatively high percentage of fat.  Fat free products often have high levels of sugar to compensate.  The truth is that consumers are not very discerning, whether it be about food, politics or religion.

The biggest problem that affects the religious communities of the world is the unwillingness to consider the choices and the reasons behind those choices.  Claims that it just feels right, or there is good scientific evidence to prove it are cheap throw away lines. Statements that are unable to be backed up are in essence meaningless.  It's like going into a court room to try and prove your innocence, claiming an alibi that cannot be substantiated.

Circular reasoning.

Many Christians say they have good reasons for what they believe.  If they didn't think they did have good reasons they would not believe what they do.  However I question the process of thinking which they rely on so heavily.  Circular reasoning usually begins with an assumption and then relies on that assumption to prove a variety of ideas.  Eventually the process returns to the assumption.  In essence the assumption is used to prove the assumption.  Does that sound ridiculous?  Well of course it is!  With circular reasoning anything can be proved.

Some Christians answer this claim by saying their Bible can be proved historically.  Can anything be proved historically?  Muslims, Hindus and many other religions make the same claims.  I hear that repeated so often but I have never had anyone who is able to back up these claims.  Of course parts of the Bible are no doubt historical.  However, those alleged accurate historical descriptions do not make the whole factual.  In fact the so called whole is a collection of documents covering a period of time between 400 to 1500 years.  It is like saying everything in the newspaper is accurate because there is historical information in it.  No reasonable person would make this assumption and any honest thinking person would have to seriously question the notion that the Bible can be proven historically.  Besides what does that statement mean?

How does your thinking stack up?

Maybe you would like to test my thinking.  Please write to me and put me to the test.

Famous Quotes:

There is no absolute knowledge. And those who claim it, whether they are scientists or dogmatists, open the door to tragedy. All information is imperfect. We have to treat it with humility.  Jacob Bronowsski (1908-1974) Polish-born British mathematician.

Men willingly believe what they wish.  Gaius Julius Caesar 100-44 B.C., Roman emperor.