3 ms·

Given the huge amount of disagreement in this thread and in the world, about what religion one should have, it is more than a little ridiculous to imply that pe

Given the huge amount of disagreement in this thread and in the world, about what religion one should have, it is more than a little ridiculous to imply that people who don't swallow some dogma whole are 'reinventing the wheel.' I don't accept your implication that it is bad to think for yourself. What kind of spiritual life are you living if you are only repeating what other people say rather than actively engaging with the subject?

fusiongyro 14y ago
You're putting words in his mouth. Having an awareness of what others have said or thought in the past is not incompatible with thinking for yourself. There may not be much value in repeating what other people say, but there often is value in hearing it.
kirse 14y ago
When I was younger, I used to hear this "thinking for yourself" phrase from a number of friends who genuinely believed they were on the path to personal freedom because they "thought for themselves"... It sounds like a sign of true independence for the man who "thinks for himself", but what does that really mean? As I grew in maturity I realized the foolishness of that statement, because nobody truly "thinks for themselves". Sure, we're using our own brain to enact a decision unique to ourselves, but the vast complexities of how we are influenced by others and our own past - through parents, family, friends, actions (or inaction), stories, the books we've read, the movies/TV we watch, the music lyrics we listen to (I could go on) - really means that our decision-making is heavily skewed by the influences we have consciously, or otherwise, allowed to shape our minds. It really makes you wonder how much we can truly "think for ourselves" Once I realized the notion that "thinking for myself" is really just a fantasy, I started to understand the importance of the old phrase "GIGO" and how important it is to choose (as best as possible) who will influence my thought processes. With that said, I think it's more than wise to look to masters in every arena of life for wisdom and influence to help us to "think for ourselves" when the time for choice arrives.
- ScottBurson 14y ago
  Ah, but then you have to choose which masters to be influenced by. Sorry, you can't get yourself out of the picture. Anyway, I disagree with your premise. Sure, we are subject to many influences. And probably, very few people stop to consider and analyze those influences, to decide how much weight to give each. But it is possible to do that -- and to the extent you do, you are indeed thinking for yourself.
  - kirse 14y ago
    Hmm, think this through a bit more. When you have been influenced on a subconscious level, you aren't aware that you have been influenced. If you aren't even aware to know it's happened, how can you possibly analyze and weight it? How much of your day do you genuinely believe you spend consciously evaluating every piece of information that stimulates your neurons? There's all sorts of information your brain is vacuuming up during the day which flies right under the conscious "radar". In fact I would argue the majority of information intake is completely stealth to our conscious awareness. The fact is, this sort of influential unawareness happens on a major scale throughout the majority of childhood and adolescence, which is when much of our deepest neurological programming happens -- especially in the "critical period" of childhood development. In this period, all of our neurological processes and decision-making are deeply and richly influenced by others, on a level that we don't even have the capacity to understand. This isn't some new concept, time and time again experiments have proven that the individual capacity for self-delusion is high and our individual capacity to reason objectively about ourselves is limited. After all, that's why we often look to others we trust when we want objective feedback. So how much do we really "think for ourselves"? Is it 50%? Doubtful. 1%? .01%? Whatever it is, our decision-making processes have already been thoroughly influenced by many things BUT ourselves over the course of our life. You might think you are picking a particular course of action because of a produced set of rationalizations, but maybe it's really just how your parents used to behave around you as a child. Either way, we can't know for sure, which results in all sorts of objective & analytical blind spots. Sure, I'll honor the fact that we do ultimately empower a decision, but how much of that choice to act is truly "us" is something that's questionable... as such, I think the best thing we can do is maximize the time we are shaped by positive influences that stimulate our brains and minimize the time we are shaped by garbage.

fusiongyro 14y ago

You're putting words in his mouth. Having an awareness of what others have said or thought in the past is not incompatible with thinking for yourself. There may not be much value in repeating what other people say, but there often is value in hearing it.

kirse 14y ago

When I was younger, I used to hear this "thinking for yourself" phrase from a number of friends who genuinely believed they were on the path to personal freedom because they "thought for themselves"... It sounds like a sign of true independence for the man who "thinks for himself", but what does that really mean? As I grew in maturity I realized the foolishness of that statement, because nobody truly "thinks for themselves". Sure, we're using our own brain to enact a decision unique to ourselves, but the vast complexities of how we are influenced by others and our own past - through parents, family, friends, actions (or inaction), stories, the books we've read, the movies/TV we watch, the music lyrics we listen to (I could go on) - really means that our decision-making is heavily skewed by the influences we have consciously, or otherwise, allowed to shape our minds. It really makes you wonder how much we can truly "think for ourselves" Once I realized the notion that "thinking for myself" is really just a fantasy, I started to understand the importance of the old phrase "GIGO" and how important it is to choose (as best as possible) who will influence my thought processes. With that said, I think it's more than wise to look to masters in every arena of life for wisdom and influence to help us to "think for ourselves" when the time for choice arrives.

ScottBurson 14y ago
Ah, but then you have to choose which masters to be influenced by. Sorry, you can't get yourself out of the picture. Anyway, I disagree with your premise. Sure, we are subject to many influences. And probably, very few people stop to consider and analyze those influences, to decide how much weight to give each. But it is possible to do that -- and to the extent you do, you are indeed thinking for yourself.
- kirse 14y ago
  Hmm, think this through a bit more. When you have been influenced on a subconscious level, you aren't aware that you have been influenced. If you aren't even aware to know it's happened, how can you possibly analyze and weight it? How much of your day do you genuinely believe you spend consciously evaluating every piece of information that stimulates your neurons? There's all sorts of information your brain is vacuuming up during the day which flies right under the conscious "radar". In fact I would argue the majority of information intake is completely stealth to our conscious awareness. The fact is, this sort of influential unawareness happens on a major scale throughout the majority of childhood and adolescence, which is when much of our deepest neurological programming happens -- especially in the "critical period" of childhood development. In this period, all of our neurological processes and decision-making are deeply and richly influenced by others, on a level that we don't even have the capacity to understand. This isn't some new concept, time and time again experiments have proven that the individual capacity for self-delusion is high and our individual capacity to reason objectively about ourselves is limited. After all, that's why we often look to others we trust when we want objective feedback. So how much do we really "think for ourselves"? Is it 50%? Doubtful. 1%? .01%? Whatever it is, our decision-making processes have already been thoroughly influenced by many things BUT ourselves over the course of our life. You might think you are picking a particular course of action because of a produced set of rationalizations, but maybe it's really just how your parents used to behave around you as a child. Either way, we can't know for sure, which results in all sorts of objective & analytical blind spots. Sure, I'll honor the fact that we do ultimately empower a decision, but how much of that choice to act is truly "us" is something that's questionable... as such, I think the best thing we can do is maximize the time we are shaped by positive influences that stimulate our brains and minimize the time we are shaped by garbage.