WHAT IS A "FREETHINKER"?
(Posted 2013-06-03 11:28:08 by Ray Lopez)

That term, "freethinker" appears all over the web nowadays, thanks to the
current popularity of atheism.  The term is meant to denote someone who is
"free" of any impediments to rational thought.  Such a person is supposedly
unencumbered by any sort of bias, prejudice, or dogmatic influence of that
evil thing referred derisively to as "religion".

This is what the term is supposed to mean.  In practice, it means, "you
agree with me and think like I think."  Many freethinkers would never
consider allowing, say, a Roman Catholic to be considered one of them.

I am a practicing Roman Catholic, and consider myself a freethinker.  After
years as a very angry atheist, I took an intellectual journey that led me
to the Roman Catholic faith.  I freely, openly, and with complete
forethought, understand and accept the teachings of the Church.  My
acceptance of these teachings in no way impedes my ability to accept and
understand the results of scientific inquiry (e.g., I have defended
Neo-Darwinism and modern cosmology against all comers for 30 years).  Nor
does my acceptance of Church teachings and traditions affect my ability to
understand that morality exists apart from religion (although Thomistic, my
foundational beliefs in ethics have little to do with Catholicism and more
to do with St. Thomas Aquinas' expansion of Aristotle, for reasons outlined
by Alasdair MacIntyre).  I can see and understand completely why people
choose to be atheists, and why people might not agree with my particular
ethical views.

Many freethinkers lump anyone who smells of religion into a category best
represented by fundamentalists.  Fundamentalists of any belief system
(atheists included) are closed-minded and scary.  Not all religious people
are fundamentalists, just as not all fundamentalists are religious people. 
Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris are two of the biggest fools to appear on
the public stage.  They blatantly trumpet their extremism and bigotry as
"freethinking", and have managed to drag a lot of people down with them. 
Their entire belief system is based upon a caricature of religious people
as ignorant, intolerant buffons, incapable of any form of rational
thought.  Just as racists portray their targets in as negative a light as
possible, so have these "intellectuals" done in their emotional war against
religions.

All of this certainly is NOT true of ALL who call themselves freethinkers. 
There are a few who are genuinely able to rationally understand opposing
viewpoints.  The true test of an honest freethinker is someone who can
explain and defend an opposing view, without resorting to deficiencies of
character or mind.  If you can explain and defend an opposing viewpoint,
and further explain and defend why you feel that viewpoint to be lacking,
and why your viewpoint is better to you, then I would say you're a
freethinker.

Edited to add:  Mark Rowlands' defense of something he calls "creedism" [
http://www.aeonmagazine.com/world-views/mark-rowlands-the-right-to-believe/
] is quite good, and relevant to this topic.  Thanks to the ever vigilant
Mark Leiter for featuring that article on his blog [
http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2013/06/in-defense-of-creedism.html
].

I'm not of the belief that _everything_ should be subject to rational
analysis.  That's a false premise.  Nonetheless I do think that everyone,
including us religious, should not object to honest criticism of their
belief systems.

--------

There are no comments on this post.


To submit a comment on this post, email rl@well.com or visit us on the web
[ http://ratthing.com ].
.