Is critical thinking part of religious belief?

[Popeyesays]

I imagine encouragement of critical thinking would fall more along axis of public vs. private benefit for both secular and religious organisations. Public benefit is associated with a culture of critical thought.

"The Great Being saith: O ye children of men! The fundamental purpose animating the Faith of God and His Religion is to safeguard the interests and promote the unity of the human race, and to foster the spirit of love and fellowship amongst men. Suffer it not to become a source of dissension and discord, of hate and enmity. This is the straight Path, the fixed and immovable foundation. Whatsoever is raised on this foundation, the changes and chances of the world can never impair its strength, nor will the revolution of countless centuries undermine its structure."
(Baha'u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 215)


Regards,
Scott

 

[Popeyesays]

Faith is strengthened by objective experience. If I pray and nothing happens, then what will motivate me to pray in the future? If I place trust in God's guidance, and my life does not improve, then what will motivate me to trust God in the future?

Dogma is important to question because it doesn't come from personal experience. Dogma comes from what other people say is true about God. Why should we trust them? They should be questioned.

The purpose of prayer is to commune with God, but why should one think one can find objective results from prayer? Why should one think that one can change reality by prayer? If prayer is to acknowlege "Thine is the power." should prayer change things from what things might be?

We pray to come in accord with the will of God, not to bring the will of God in alighment with individual desire.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Popeyesays]

Faith is strengthened by objective experience. If I pray and nothing happens, then what will motivate me to pray in the future? If I place trust in God's guidance, and my life does not improve, then what will motivate me to trust God in the future?

Dogma is important to question because it doesn't come from personal experience. Dogma comes from what other people say is true about God. Why should we trust them? They should be questioned.

Everything SHOULD be questioned. However, we can't expect the answers to be material.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Radio Frequency X]

The purpose of prayer is to commune with God, but why should one think one can find objective results from prayer? Why should one think that one can change reality by prayer? If prayer is to acknowlege "Thine is the power." should prayer change things from what things might be?

We pray to come in accord with the will of God, not to bring the will of God in alighment with individual desire.

Regards,
Scott

I have a relationship with a God that cares about my will and my life. I pray for individual desires because I know God will create opportunities for me to fulfill those desires. This happens all the time for me. I am always responsible to act, but much of life is out of my hands, and this is where God seems to work on my behalf. I am not a slave to God's will, nor God to mine. It is a relationship.

 

[Popeyesays]

I have a relationship with a God that cares about my will and my life. I pray for individual desires because I know God will create opportunities for me to fulfill those desires. This happens all the time for me. I am always responsible to act, but much of life is out of my hands, and this is where God seems to work on my behalf. I am not a slave to God's will, nor God to mine. It is a relationship.

"Thy will be done." is part of the only exemplary prayer of Jesus.

I understand praying for healing, protection, thanksgiving, et al. But in the end, we are subject to the will of God as is all of creation. Praying will not forestall death in the end. Death comes to all, just as surely as they were born--that's the will of God. I have a relationship with God as well. That relationship acknowledges that the cup does not necessarily pass, just because I would prefer that it does. So my prayer is ultimately to abide with the will of God. Christ prayed for that as well.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Radio Frequency X]

"Thy will be done." is part of the only exemplary prayer of Jesus.

I understand praying for healing, protection, thanksgiving, et al. But in the end, we are subject to the will of God as is all of creation. Praying will not forestall death in the end. Death comes to all, just as surely as they were born--that's the will of God. I have a relationship with God as well. That relationship acknowledges that the cup does not necessarily pass, just because I would prefer that it does. So my prayer is ultimately to abide with the will of God. Christ prayed for that as well.

Regards,
Scott

I think the will of God is only a part of prayer. When I pray, I usually begin with thanks. Then I pray for myself and others. What God gives me helps me to become a better and happier person. I want to know what God's will for me life is, because that is where I'll discover purpose. But I don't know God's will for my life. I don't know what God's will is for the world.

However, as long as I accept responsibility for my life and know that nothing will happen if I don't choose to act, there is nothing wrong with praying my will. I'm not a Christian, so I have a little more freedom in this regard.

 

[Booko]

Just a general question. Is it healthy for your belief to question it? Or is it more healthy to accept what is taught?

My religion not only encourages it, but insists on it. "Individual investigation of the truth" is one of the cardinal teachings, after all. We don't depend on a professional religious class to do our thinking for us -- we do that ourselves.

Otherwise what is the effect of questioning your belief: does testing it tend to strengthen it?

Sometimes it gets weaker on its way to getting stronger.

Patience is something that seems to be required for any sort of understanding -- religious or otherwise. There are times when you just have to take a while and sit back and look at something until you finally "get it." At times, it may take years, or possibly even a lifetime.

Though generally I think of it more like study and reflection leads to deeper understanding (rather than "stronger" anyway).

 

[robtex]

quick forenote. My post is too long at 11558 characters with 10000 being the limit. So I cutting it up into two posts.

I am reading this thread and like the points brought up on it. I see the practice of religion as an emotional transaction that strongly downplays critical thinking in most instances. It is kinda the "wrong tool for the job" when it comes to religion. If you look at the powerwords of religion you can see how it is the wrong tool for the job. Some of the the words I see that represent religous ideas and ideals are:

Faith
truth
revealed (revelation, spirual knowledged ect)
belief
unconditional love (ulitimate love source of love, love as a noun and existing entity ect)
prophecy
ultimate good, ultimate evil (or substitute absolute for ulimate)
saved
blissful existance (afterlife, nirvana, edan ect)
spirtual communication (telepathy, clairvoyance, two-way prayer ect)

and than you look at the practice of critical thinking you are not going to find these types of words used to make assessments. Instead you will find emperical data, and evidencable analysis.

Wikipedia here offers this on the subject of critical thinking

1) itemize options from all relevant sides and collect logical arguements from each
2) break arguements into their constituent statements
3) examine statements
4) locate opposing claims
5) assess weigh of various claims

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking

In a statement on critical thinking by Michel Scriven and Richard Paul say this qoute:

"[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] Critical thinking is that mode of thinking - about any subject, content, or
problem - in which the thinker improves the quality of his or her thinking
by skillfully taking charge of the structures inherent in thinking and
imposing intellectual standards upon them"

They further articulate that as a result the critical thinker will:

1) raise vital questions and problems
2) gather and assess relevant information
3) thinks openmindly with alternative systems of thought
4) communicates effectively with others in solutions to complexed problems.

http://www.criticalthinking.org/aboutCT/definingCT.shtml
[/FONT]


If you take those ideas and i can footnote some more at the end of this long post, you will see they are in conflict with most religious groups and institutions. Some of the more glaring dictomies are;

Religious gravitation towards excluvism. The idea of their faith is not an academic proposition but rather an exclusive idea to that group taken on faith. For instance the Christans feel that exclusive Christ is their savior, buddhists feel Buddah was awaken to the truth of life and the Muslims exclusively feel Mohammad was revealed the Koran by Allah through Gabriel. Weighing the pro's cons and strengths of theories presented is not a componet of religious thought and is outright seen as wrong by dogmatic faiths.

On the gathering and assessing of information the "gathering" is done through prayer, revelation, prophecy and telepathy, as opposed to emperical data, analization of affect of postulated theories and evidencable data. One feels in religion and so it is.

Raising vital questions which is Scriven and Paul suggest is a componet of critical thinking is akin to "loss of faith" in most religious groups. If you don't think this is so just for the purpose of academics next time you go to church, even if you believe Jesus is your savior ask your pastor "What if we got it wrong and Jesus was just another human religious leader just like you?" and see reaction you get. Likewise, as wikipedia suggested in step 1) itemize options from all relevant sides is not applicable because most religions hold the "truth" andt there is only one side to itemize.

 

[robtex]

2nd post:

Ideas specifically where critical thinking and religion clash are:

1) the existance of a non-evidencable soul
2) the assessment of an invisible god
3) the postulation of the specific location of heaven

In these three (and there are many others) one doesn't really see theories on why a soul exists but there is no evidence for one. No groups that believe in Heaven have attempted to pinpoint its location by using emperical meathods like pointing the hubble at various places for it nor do you see any religous text postulating on why God exists, and yet is invisible to man.

In summary the vocabulary used by religion and the process of assesssing reality is imcompatable with the propositions for critical thought. Until such time that critical thinking finds revelation and prophecy as valued technquies for assessing information or religion academically evaluates both the validity of competing religions and the key points of mystery (like what God looks like) as well as acadmically assessing the possiblity that no God exists the two ideas critical thought and religion will be a dichotomy in practice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking
footnotes:
http://www.cbu.edu/~lschmitt/M690/Critical%20Thinking.htm
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/ric700/public_html/critical_thinking.htm

 

[Quiddity]

In summary the vocabulary used by religion and the process of assesssing reality is imcompatable with the propositions for critical thought. Until such time that critical thinking finds revelation and prophecy as valued technquies for assessing information or religion academically evaluates both the validity of competing religions and the key points of mystery (like what God looks like) as well as acadmically assessing the possiblity that no God exists the two ideas critical thought and religion will be a dichotomy in practice.

I whole heartedly disagree with this. It basically grabbed areas of religion which they know can't be proven through any contemporary method and called into question the whole of religion. Critical thinking most deffinately is part of religous thought.

And there are theists who subscribe to a specific religion and are not driven and fueled by emotions. In fact, I think it's many that leave religion that had this themselves, so it's not uncommon for them to think so.

 

[Popeyesays]

"Ideas specifically where critical thinking and religion clash are:

1) the existance of a non-evidencable soul
2) the assessment of an invisible god
3) the postulation of the specific location of heaven"

1) There is no empirical evidence for String Theory either. So?
2) That God is unknowable, does not mean that I cannot attempt to know Him.
3) Heaven is not a place. Neither is hell. They are states of being. North is not a place, it is a direction RELATIVE to where I might be. The Zenith is not a place it is a direction RELATIVE to where I am.

Truth as I can know it is not ABSOLUTE. It is relative. "I" am not the absolute center of existence.

I can freely admit all this and still discuss using 'critical thinking', since critical thinking has a starting point and an ending point NEITHER of which are absolute in value.

All reasoning requires an assumption of truth and that assumption is always relative.
"All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man.
Therefore Socrates is mortal." is the classic syllogism, it begins with a relative truth, reasons from that relative truth to a relative conclusion. No absolutes are involved.

The physical body of man is indeed mortal. Does man have anything aobut him which is not physical? One cannot prove it either way. Therefore Socrates may or may not have something immortal as part of him. Killing Socrates' physical body may or may not bring all of him to an end.

After all neither matter nor energy can be destroyed in this reality. We know that the physical matter of the body disintegrates to its constituent elements and compounds. That there is an energy component of the human is demonstrable, what happens to that energy? Who knows? Nobody.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Popeyesays]

I think the will of God is only a part of prayer. When I pray, I usually begin with thanks. Then I pray for myself and others. What God gives me helps me to become a better and happier person. I want to know what God's will for me life is, because that is where I'll discover purpose. But I don't know God's will for my life. I don't know what God's will is for the world.

However, as long as I accept responsibility for my life and know that nothing will happen if I don't choose to act, there is nothing wrong with praying my will. I'm not a Christian, so I have a little more freedom in this regard.

Beseeching God is indeed permissable and good. I'm not a Christian either.
Frubals!

Regards,
Scott

 

[Ozzie]

hmmm...but aren't you assuming Buddhism is true to begin with? (imho) that would qualify as an assumption of truth.

Not at all. I am an accidental Buddhist and could be knocked off my perch by the first apparition of Mary I see, or postcard from Jesus I receive. That's why I qualify my relationship with Buddhism as blindsight. Any pretension to know the truth is just that, a pretension IMO. Incidentally I use meditation as critical thinking device yet do not consider the practice of meditation to be truth. That should satisfy Scotts need for an example.



Oz

 

[Ozzie]

BTW people, thanks for the fantastic response to this thread. Where is the smilie symbol for "top effort"?

 

[Popeyesays]

Not at all. I am an accidental Buddhist and could be knocked off my perch by the first apparition of Mary I see, or postcard from Jesus I receive. That's why I qualify my relationship with Buddhism as blindsight. Any pretension to know the truth is just that, a pretension IMO. Incidentally I use meditation as critical thinking device yet do not consider the practice of meditation to be truth. That should satisfy Scotts need for an example.



Oz

Well, it's not very concrete. I think it's entirely different from practical critical thinking' but I understand the intent.

TRUTH cannot be found. It is beyond our perception, we are 'blind' to it, it can't be perceived by the human mind. Relative truth can be perceived and described through the faculty of critical thought. Neither can we know 'God' by our own perception. The finite cannot perceive the infinite.

Science and Religion are our eyes, if we close one and ignore its existence, we are only blinding ourselves.

I think this a good thread too. Kudos to everyone.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Mr. Hair]

Is critical thinking part of religious belief?

I think that critical thinking is an integral part of religious belief, or at least general religiosity; of course one certainly need not be religious to hold or identify with a religion.

Just a general question. Is it healthy for your belief to question it? Or is it more healthy to accept what is taught?

By questioning, I accept. By accepting, I question. One leads towards t'other, and flows to the next. *smiles*

If I knew what my beliefs were, perhaps I could give you a more detailed answer. Perhaps not. *shrugs*

I have the mind of a fool,
Confused, confused.

Others are bright and intelligent,
I alone am dull, dull.
Drifting about on the ocean,
Blown endlessley.

 

[KPereira]

I believe that questioning what we believe is imperative to truly accepting it. If I had accepted Catholicism simply because thats how I was raised...that would be ignorant. Why would I believe in Catholicism? Why would it be important to me? What makes sense about it? What doesn't? What needs clarification? Am I completely understanding it without bias? Those are all important questions to ask. To blindly follow a religion spawns ignorance and hatred of other groups. It is important that we educate ourselves not only about what we believe, but about what others believe as well.

 

[Pah]

I believe that questioning what we believe is imperative to truly accepting it. If I had accepted Catholicism simply because thats how I was raised...that would be ignorant. Why would I believe in Catholicism? Why would it be important to me? What makes sense about it? What doesn't? What needs clarification? Am I completely understanding it without bias? Those are all important questions to ask. To blindly follow a religion spawns ignorance and hatred of other groups. It is important that we educate ourselves not only about what we believe, but about what others believe as well.

I've been wondering at what lwevel of understanding is present. When I've asked questions,I frequently get the "what" of the religion. I almost never get the "why". For example, "why is there a Trinity "configured" the way it is?

I think the "why" is actually more important than the "what".

 

[Popeyesays]

I've been wondering at what lwevel of understanding is present. When I've asked questions,I frequently get the "what" of the religion. I almost never get the "why". For example, "why is there a Trinity "configured" the way it is?

I think the "why" is actually more important than the "what".

I think the why is occasionally beyond our understanding and it always requires interpretation to understand. Interpretation is pretty subjective in nature.

Actually, as to the trinity, every revealed religion expresses the trinity.

1) The Giver of the Gift (God)
2) The Receiver of the Gift (the Prophet)
3) The Gift the Spirit of God (the Revelation)

It's only when one tries to make each part God in Itself that the problems arise.

Regards,
Scott