Critical thinking used by believers about their own belief

[mikkel_the_dane]

I actually had a little bit more to say on this topic.

As I said, although critical thinking can leave one still believing to some extent, as with Bishop Spong, there is no doubt whatever that if you are practice real critical thinking, those beliefs will not be the same -- they will inevitably have to give a little.

If critical thinking is defined as: "Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action," then one is going to have to include one's observations in the real world -- and that can have its effect.

One example is how many Protestant denominations have found their way to celebrating same-sex unions, where once Christianity universally condemned such ideas. Observation and experience in the real world shows clearly that homosexuality is not a choice -- and if it is not a choice, the believer in a Special Creation must find a way to include homosexuality IN that creation.

This is true of everything else that we think we understand -- if our understanding is at odds with our observations and experiences, then thinking critically forces us to adjust our understanding.

Yeah, but you can also question the real world as an abstract concept and learn that there are not just one set of assumptions for the real world.
So we are both critical thinkers, we apparently just do different assumptions about the real world.

 

[wellwisher]

This is not something I have done about my of faith....and I should have done it.
What will happen if believers started to do critical thinking about every aspects of their own faith?

Some of RF's believers may already do it daily
Will our faith get stronger or will it be a to big challenge?

In terms of critical thinking about those things that are believed though faith, instead of through experiment, what we do know is many people have faith. I would infer that there has to be something underlying this behavior or else faith would be far less common. I am not judging one's faith but rather looking for the source of this common human charisma that one can find in all religions.

I am may or may not disagree with what different people have faith in, but the fact is their faith exists due to some form of inner based evidence. This is undeniable. The question is what is the source of inner data that can lead to faith? The innovator has a gut feeling before anything is created in reality for those who need to see to believe. Critical thinking does not have to start with a negative. Rather is can be based on analyzing a common behavior that underlies a range of different beliefs.

Faith is the belief in things not seen. This means it does not come to one from the outside; sensory systems. Instead it appears to come from a source that lies within. My next question is, is there a brain or a neural explanation for this unique inner data generation that reinforces the charisma of faith? Many religions speak of the inner man. Is the inner man somehow connected to the brain?

Psychology has found that we have two centers of consciousness; inner self and the ego. The inner self is much older and is connected to our DNA. The inner self is the same platform for consciousness that common to all humans. It also appears to be what animals have for consciousness; connected to their instinct. The inner self defines us as a species; human nature. Human nature is the same for all humans no matter your race or beliefs, due our shared human DNA and the brain's operating system that leads to the conscious POV of the inner self.

The ego is newer on the evolutionary scale and appears to have formed with the rise civilization. Civilization required one learn new ways apart from the ways of the natural instinct. The ego is dependent on learned cultural knowledge, instead of innate knowledge from within; instinct. The animal acts upon an inner urge, not based on book learning or a consensus of outer experts.

My guess is faith has a connection to the inner self. The inner self by being the main interface for consciousness and our human DNA, uses the main frame parts of the brain; super computer. It can make use of subliminal learning. The ego is more like a terminal connected to the mainframe. Both the inner self and the ego will synthesize the same sensory input data, with the inner self trying to synthesize this data in a way that is common to all humans; integral. The ego is looking out for number one; group and self; differential. The former integration schema is how all religions work; divine law common to all. Maybe we see and hear the will of God through an inner awareness of our inner self. It is still connected to the divine plan; natural instinct and DNA.

Many years ago I worked under this assumption and did unconscious mind experiments on myself to see if the inner self was real. It was one thing to read about it and accept it due to experts. It was another thing to prove it to myself with direct data. That is what a critical thinker does. What I found is the inner self is more complicated than a single center. It arises from the DNA based operating system of the human brain, and makes use of a range of support firmware; masks of the inner self. This explains the approach of mythology; based on the range of its firmware. This approach evolved to monotheism; inner self proper, as ancient humans got deeper in the brain's operating system.

These ancients were more aware of the inner self and many set up systems. Many of these systems downplay the ego; humbled to quiet its noise, so the voice of the inner self could be heard. Faith is when the ego terminal hooks up with the mainframe while the mainframe is doing natural synthesis.

f science wants data they need to induce their own inner self to experience the inner data source that will give them faith. This data only comes from inside. Although, many outside systems of teaching can help one trigger the operating system; command lines. To me, my research made my faith stronger since science and religion can unite when it comes to the brain's operating system. But it required a path of inner data that science is not evolved enough to follow. It needs first person data and not just third person data. One much become the scientists and the experiment.

 

[metis]

This is not something I have done about my of faith....and I should have done it.
What will happen if believers started to do critical thinking about every aspects of their own faith?

Some of RF's believers may already do it daily
Will our faith get stronger or will it be a to big challenge?

I think that they would be far less orthodox, and this is what happened to me over the decades. I'm so far out in left field that I can barely even see the ballpark.

For example, physicist Leonard Susskind says that scientists tend to make lousy conventional theists.

 

[Link]

Yes, I like the idea that the question is far more important than the answer. IMO, understanding that is the key to critical thinking.

My viewpoint, that attitude sets itself up to ignorance and not holding on to what is certain, and abandoning what is certain for what is doubtful.

 

[viole]

Well, no! Not IMO. As a global skeptic all I have are beliefs and faith. The worst believers IMO are those, who treat their beliefs as not really beliefs, because they are special. Everybody else have beliefs, but not them. And that has nothing to do with religion or not.

Ok. That you risk to lose it, unless you are a global skeptic. Better?

and what do you mean with “worst believers”. How does “best” vs. “worst” apply under a regime of global skepticism? Couldn’t the next global skeptic simply be skeptical of whatever you say next?

better?

ciao

- viole

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Ok. That you risk to lose it, unless you are a global skeptic.

and what do you mean with “worst believers”. How does “best” vs. “worst” apply under a regime of global skepticism? Couldn’t the next global skeptic simply be skeptical of whatever you say next?

better?

ciao

- viole

Well, it is IMO. So worst are those, who don't understand the limits of truth, proof, evidence, rationality and so on. Or declare their faith The Truth.
If we are to make sense of the world, then to me, we have to acknowledge the limits in that.
As for those who understand the limits of knowledge as such, we are still individuals and have different personal value systems.

 

[viole]

Well, it is IMO. So worst are those, who don't understand the limits of truth, proof, evidence, rationality and so on. Or declare their faith The Truth.
If we are to make sense of the world, then to me, we have to acknowledge the limits in that.
As for those who understand the limits of knowledge as such, we are still individuals and have different personal value systems.

Aww. Sure you will take care of you. I am confident that we, the people who actually give value to evidence, rationality and so, will take care of minorities like yours, despite their skepticism. We do the same with people who believe that vaccinations turn them into the fly, or something.

Ciao

- viole

 

[rational experiences]

Jesus didn't update the Jewish religion. The New Testament states that he:
1 - fulfilled all the Jewish law
2 - ended the law

When you see the historic rise of Christian cathedrals, a new priesthood etc
you see people who either cannot undersand this, or refuse to accept it.

The advice life sacrificed is medical.

The life body of a human was not prophecy predicted to be life sacrificed from temple pyramid science. As if it were meant to be. Or as if science owned life sacrificed.

Science practice had caused it by predicted human mens life returned. The scientist self.

The past stated life was sacrificed.

What was predictable. Man still owned civilization. Inventive science resourcing his motivated personal greed. Human greed had not stopped.

The life mind purpose scientist was predictive. He said I coded myself within the code.

Galileo equalled lie gaol. As proof he was known....the scientist...predictable....self possessed the wisdom to destroy life by sun theism nuclear.

The teaching spiritual orders were formed to stop him. As humans truth. Human laws. Why fighting changed by over rule involved reasserted sciences.

The old testimonials said if men ignored his O earth God teachings life would be sacrificed again.

You couldn't write Moses scientific data until mutated life mind body had evolved. Before it was assessed it was just a verbal story.

It was always advised by an evolved life mind realising.

We don't live to be sacrificed. The Jewish humanity were not living to be slaves were they! Slaves to build civilization and the science buildings.

Medical advice after irradiation changed bio genesis human and animal DNA by effects. Blood cell bone.

A medical building healing resonance as a phi resonating healing effect was built as the healing Centre.

It had a purpose. It was a rich man's purpose as he knew he had caused it as the hypocrite.

You don't apply new unless learning was assessed.

The dis spirited human scientist. First he was caring loving innocent. The moment he pressed the button on his machine was our human too late moment.

Why the documents were written as he became possessed. It then became even more difficult to reason with him.

 

[rational experiences]

When men example the Baha'i proof heal they live and they learn.

About man's math pyramid science evils. Past.

Name themself a teacher.

A teacher owns realisation.

So the man seeing realising advice after the Moses incident to write the whole story after the event saw his family once again used to slave build science technology buildings...as the writer of Moses said let my people go.

Moses after the event story.

We aren't your slaves. Your technology destroyed life before teachings. Old reviewed.

By the healed evolved review. I must write the evidence my family previously enslaved is being murdered again by scientists.

To own technology. As in the past they had been set free living in communities as family.

Much like we witness today. Lovely cities. Mutual family blasted out of owning a community.

Same as same the old rich man's practice.

1000 year evidence shroud advice involved men trying to rebuild old Jerusalem science building pyramid practice again.

Fought over ownership status.

Realising Islam Moses Muhammad teachings written had assisted the re emergence of the wisdom.

As a teacher of spirit did not include science.

Satanisms maths symbolic beast terms alienation of human theists machine owners irradiating life biology genesis.

The argument what should or should not be taught.

Rome in the irradiation falling Satan star return teaching.

Introduced pulpit come and Sit in the church science explained. Humans had to ask questions so a teacher could depict correct or incorrect advice.

Teachers then lost their mind. Reason the theist men historic were spiritual first. Men who knew to teach by historic man choice were losing their mind intelligence of spirituality.

The teacher was being sacrificed again.

Lived it. Observed it. Life knew it was in trouble again.

Holy wars were against science returned.

Our brothers who taught Jesus were murdered. Who knew spirituality versus lying maths satanisms beast terms.

Pretty obvious why the Baha'i whose Muslim or Islam heritage had agreed with in ancient terms with Jesus teachings yet now didn't.

Irradiating effect. Burnt star asteroid fall gas. Not the science a cause returned.

He fought the Baha'i argument of spirituality and not science.

Men's disagreements in the past numerous for teaching and telling the truth. Whether it was evil or not in teaching and just choosing to being spiritual.

Still the same choice today when you read and interpret meaning.

Some men were afraid not detailing history could be used against us

Was the same answer about the history of science being used against us.

The answer hence owned a doubled meaning. Two faced remark.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Aww. Sure you will take care of you. I am confident that we, the people who actually give value to evidence, rationality and so, will take care of minorities like yours, despite their skepticism. We do the same with people who believe that vaccinations turn them into the fly, or something.

Ciao

- viole

Yeah, you have your beliefs and I have mine.

 

[Nakosis]

My viewpoint, that attitude sets itself up to ignorance and not holding on to what is certain, and abandoning what is certain for what is doubtful.

So I take it you are not a fan of critical thinking.

 

[rational experiences]

I know humanity prove their spirituality by reading a document yet can overlook all wrongs taught in the book to be spiritual. By choice of relationships and behaviours.

The exact reading of the same advice.

Which places the reader in position reading interpretation.

Is still developing ourself from the past irradiating fall in heavens. We are all not perfect. Lots of bad human behaviours and sickness.

We are now realising it is recurring. Man's fall from spirituality. Causes. Not going away as the return it is increasing instead.

To gain a following means a lot of humans were involved in similar incidences.

The teachings state we wait for the return is pretty obvious to a scientist it is about change seeing science wrote the thesis creation. As a human thinker.

So creation said it is created. That in the beginning stone rock did not exist.

So anyone claiming in the beginning is lying. As stone and Rock the created was not present in the beginning as substance type when no creation existed.

Created is the word advice.

In the beginning of human science stone Rock did exist as man took the dusts to build a metal machine.

The dusts were dusts. Present. What in science is the non presence of dusts? A theory by a reaction. As metal was inside gods body O earth naturally.

In a thesis in the beginning there was no metal. Yet metal did exist in God earth in pressure seams.

Another lie was applied. As science of man in the beginning did not own gods power. Was the only position did not own but wanted.

The bible depicts sewing. Not logical in a term scientific advice no form beginnings today.

He said hence I tried to introduce God to the anti effect. No God. As the stone Rock not irradiating supported life.

Purpose time shift natural mass from its natural substance from its place of held pressure. Plate collapse. As seam was full.

How tectonic carpenter terms were involved...plate term and consuming the last term before sacrifice occurred of the body of god. Inheritor.

He taught as just a man he tried to time shift the sun cause. RA in old terms...radiation.

Going back in time the sun put light into earths atmosphere. Time shift going back would theory how to remove light by time going back to its beginnings. The sun.

Yet the sun had opened sink holes. So you cannot close a sin hole of gods. As if stone mass could heal it's body O planet wound.

Men of science created new sin. Sink holes.

Theists hence would say illogical is a human theist claim in the beginning there was no light. As they were living inside of an alight heavens above their head.

To depict creation by a science theist is exact reasoned. Self present first to depict human thought science.

As the storyteller. You cannot talk about what isn't in a subject of word use. Words allowed any topic to be chosen discussed theoried upon. As the subject is not one it is Multi varied.

To know means a study of what existed. Lots of subjects all different.

Ask a theist why do you persist to claim you personally as just a human own a thesis why humans exist?

What does your idea mean to a human?

In reality it owns no reason. As we do exist.

If you say I write a human story for humans about humans hurt by men in science. Then the bible as holy books owned a different purpose than what is preached.

It was about humans want to remove form. And why human life was hurt.

As we never owned in the beginning as life on earth.

Subject human science use maths first.

A human.
O maths relates direct to O form held. Earth as God first is not maths first.

If a human says maths proves DNA was changed by maths. As earth in maths is one as a thesis to minus. Then he proved he did it...the scientist.

If science says I want to time shift the suns origin earth change then as a sun remains constant he would overheat earths mass only.

As the sun wasn't going to suddenly cool to a higher larger colder pre mass that exploded to attack earth.

Why sun theists were termed Satanists.

 

[rational experiences]

Humans claiming by vision voice sound image recorded. That it was owned by humans.

The critical thinking says it was owned by God the state in the heavens. Not by humans at all.

Reasoned why.

Machines once communiicated to machines to pyramids.

Three.

Designer human thinker owner builder operator is the constant thinking.

Machines began from mineral dusts converted. Not any thinking constant. Yet constantly reacted.

Modern theme a human is part bio mechanical.

Why?

One machine communicating to one machine receiving. Two machines communicating communications. Out in space. Between communicating towers related ground.

Machine converting dusts daily by designer mind controller reaction. Scientists.

Dusts the machine. Reaction by mass the machines body. Reacted machine design gone.

Still owned machine doing the reaction. As if the machine remanifested as a higher machine body.

In thesis a design of a machines string to be a machine by design time shifted it's manifested materials used in a resource.

Mind theist possessed in fact by communication false machine feedback.

A form of scientific self possession.

 

[PearlSeeker]

This is not something I have done about my of faith....and I should have done it.
What will happen if believers started to do critical thinking about every aspects of their own faith?

I started to do this. Question, research... I became less and less orthodox... more open-minded... It was not easy to accept my beliefs to be shaken. There is less comfort and certainty than I thought but I rather have truth.

 

[Spirit of Light]

I started to do this. Question, research... I became less and less orthodox... more open-minded... It was not easy to accept my beliefs to be shaken. There is less comfort and certainty than I thought but I rather have truth.

Sometimes we do have to be shaken to be able to see deeper truth about our own belief