Free Thinkers

The term "Free thinker" comes up quite a lot in this forum. So I was wondering...

Who here would describe themselves as a free thinker? And if so, what do you mean by that?

What is it that distinguishes someone who is a free thinker from one who is not?

The term "Free thinker" comes up quite a lot in this forum. So I was wondering...

Who here would describe themselves as a free thinker? And if so, what do you mean by that?

What is it that distinguishes someone who is a free thinker from one who is not?

Yeh, not sure on free thinking. How about you give us an example on a free thought you have had so we can get an idea of what you are on about?

Quote from: Copper Knickers on January 30, 2016, 01:25:57 PM

The term "Free thinker" comes up quite a lot in this forum. So I was wondering...

Who here would describe themselves as a free thinker? And if so, what do you mean by that?

What is it that distinguishes someone who is a free thinker from one who is not?

Yeh, not sure on free thinking. How about you give us an example on a free thought you have had so we can get an idea of what you are on about?

I'm not sure either. That was the gist of my post. It's a term that is used a lot here and I'm interested to know what posters mean by it.

A free thinker is someone who isn't hindered by "established knowledge". We will question anything and everything. We are also happy to be proved wrong. Being a free thinker usually shows how much "established knowledge" is unverifiable and thus questionable.

We rarely find ourselves wrong due to not committing ourselves to a view that is questionable.

The indoctrinated dislike free thinkers because they believe implicitly on assumptions that we question.

A free thinker is someone who isn't hindered by "established knowledge". We will question anything and everything. We are also happy to be proved wrong. Being a free thinker usually shows how much "established knowledge" is unverifiable and thus questionable.

We rarely find ourselves wrong due to not committing ourselves to a view that is questionable.

The indoctrinated dislike free thinkers because they believe implicitly on assumptions that we question.

Couldn't have expressed it any better. Wonderful post.

Quote from: legion on January 30, 2016, 01:53:35 PM

A free thinker is someone who isn't hindered by "established knowledge". We will question anything and everything. We are also happy to be proved wrong. Being a free thinker usually shows how much "established knowledge" is unverifiable and thus questionable.

We rarely find ourselves wrong due to not committing ourselves to a view that is questionable.

The indoctrinated dislike free thinkers because they believe implicitly on assumptions that we question.

Couldn't have expressed it any better. Wonderful post.

Glad you liked it. To be fair, it was a reasonable question from the OP. Others may have their own definition, but that is mine.

A free thinker is someone who isn't hindered by "established knowledge". We will question anything and everything.

It's one thing to question "established knowledge".  In fact, it's good to question "established knowledge".  However, rejecting "established knowledge" just because it's "established knowledge" doesn't do anyone any good.

We are also happy to be proved wrong.

The general consensus on this boar suggests otherwise.

Quote from: legion on January 30, 2016, 01:53:35 PM

A free thinker is someone who isn't hindered by "established knowledge". We will question anything and everything.

It's one thing to question "established knowledge".  In fact, it's good to question "established knowledge".  However, rejecting "established knowledge" just because it's "established knowledge" doesn't do anyone any good.

Quote from: legion on January 30, 2016, 01:53:35 PM

We are also happy to be proved wrong.

The general consensus on this boar suggests otherwise.

Your post made no sense. Perhaps you could try again?

The term "Free thinker" comes up quite a lot in this forum. So I was wondering...

Who here would describe themselves as a free thinker? And if so, what do you mean by that?

What is it that distinguishes someone who is a free thinker from one who is not?

A free thinker looks at experiences and phenomema. Then he compares convention explanations against common sense and his personal knowledge. A non free thinker always relies on convention and another authority figure to tell him what to think. Free thinkers will not get boxed in, if something is explained in a more reasonable way, they will tend toward that. Non free thinkers rarely change their mind, even when better explanations are put forth, they are very dogmatic.

Quote from: Copper Knickers on January 30, 2016, 01:25:57 PM

The term "Free thinker" comes up quite a lot in this forum. So I was wondering...

Who here would describe themselves as a free thinker? And if so, what do you mean by that?

What is it that distinguishes someone who is a free thinker from one who is not?

A free thinker looks at experiences and phenomema. Then he compares convention explanations against common sense and his personal knowledge. A non free thinker always relies on convention and another authority figure to tell him what to think. Free thinkers will not get boxed in, if something is explained in a more reasonable way, they will tend toward that. Non free thinkers rarely change their mind, even when better explanations are put forth, they are very dogmatic.

I've got a level 6 physics paper here, if you care to have a crack at it.

I'd like you to apply some of this "personal knowledge" and "common sense" as I'm certain it will be a doddle for you 

I've got a level 6 physics paper here, if you care to have a crack at it.

This sounds like something a nerd would say in an even nerdier game of D&D.   

We are also happy to be proved wrong.

lol

Your post made no sense. Perhaps you could try again?

Why am I not surprised.

1.
A: "Here is established knowledge."
B: "Hmmm sounds weird. Doesn't sound possible. How does this work?"
A: "It happens because of blah blah."
B: "And how is blah blah possible?"
A: "Because of blah."
B: "Ah well that's a basic given. I now see how blah blah and the established knowledge happen by connecting the dots. Thank you."

GOOD

2.
A: "Here is established knowledge."
B: "Did you say................ established? This means it must be false and created by NASA. Now I know it's fake. I only believe things I can see and touch and smell."

BAD


Guess which category you fall into.

A free thinker looks at experiences and phenomema. Then he compares convention explanations against common sense and his personal knowledge. A non free thinker always relies on convention and another authority figure to tell him what to think. Free thinkers will not get boxed in, if something is explained in a more reasonable way, they will tend toward that. Non free thinkers rarely change their mind, even when better explanations are put forth, they are very dogmatic.

I agree with Hoppy,  what's this forum coming to...     One of the maxims of scientific enquiry is "question everything"  never take anything at face value.

Flat earthers on the other hand are very dogmatic,  they ignore evidence and claim conspiracy at every turn,  they are the very opposite of the free thinkers they claim to be.

Quote from: hoppy on January 30, 2016, 03:54:09 PM

A free thinker looks at experiences and phenomema. Then he compares convention explanations against common sense and his personal knowledge. A non free thinker always relies on convention and another authority figure to tell him what to think. Free thinkers will not get boxed in, if something is explained in a more reasonable way, they will tend toward that. Non free thinkers rarely change their mind, even when better explanations are put forth, they are very dogmatic.

I agree with Hoppy,  what's this forum coming to...     One of the maxims of scientific enquiry is "question everything"  never take anything at face value.

Flat earthers on the other hand are very dogmatic,  they ignore evidence and claim conspiracy at every turn,  they are the very opposite of the free thinkers they claim to be.

We are the ones who are dogmatic?  You roundies come to a Flat Earth forum, stomp you feet with your fingers in your ears, claim that we are lying/joking/wrong/mistaken, and then have the nerve to call us dogmatic?  Do you not see the irony here? 

I would just say a free thinker is someone who thinks anything he wants without constraints or feeling guilty about his thoughts.

We are the ones who are dogmatic?  You roundies come to a Flat Earth forum, stomp you feet with your fingers in your ears, claim that we are lying/joking/wrong/mistaken, and then have the nerve to call us dogmatic?  Do you not see the irony here?

Are you happy to put that to the test?   If I can offer you proof that the earth is round,  would you accept that proof?   
Likewise I'm prepared to accept that the earth is flat if you can offer me proof that it is flat. 

Quote from: jroa on January 30, 2016, 07:02:55 PM

We are the ones who are dogmatic?  You roundies come to a Flat Earth forum, stomp you feet with your fingers in your ears, claim that we are lying/joking/wrong/mistaken, and then have the nerve to call us dogmatic?  Do you not see the irony here?

Are you happy to put that to the test?   If I can offer you proof that the earth is round,  would you accept that proof?   
Likewise I'm prepared to accept that the earth is flat if you can offer me proof that it is flat.

"You" have proof of a round earth, can "you" show us?
By the way, your curved beach photo will not suffice!

Quote from: Rayzor on January 30, 2016, 09:58:44 PM

Quote from: jroa on January 30, 2016, 07:02:55 PM

We are the ones who are dogmatic?  You roundies come to a Flat Earth forum, stomp you feet with your fingers in your ears, claim that we are lying/joking/wrong/mistaken, and then have the nerve to call us dogmatic?  Do you not see the irony here?

Are you happy to put that to the test?   If I can offer you proof that the earth is round,  would you accept that proof?   
Likewise I'm prepared to accept that the earth is flat if you can offer me proof that it is flat.

"You" have proof of a round earth, can "you" show us?
By the way, your curved beach photo will not suffice!

Since when ANYTHING has sufficed before to you? No evidence will be enough.

A free thinker is someone who isn't hindered by "established knowledge". We will question anything and everything. We are also happy to be proved wrong. Being a free thinker usually shows how much "established knowledge" is unverifiable and thus questionable.

We rarely find ourselves wrong due to not committing ourselves to a view that is questionable.

The indoctrinated dislike free thinkers because they believe implicitly on assumptions that we question.

You write "established knowledge" in quotes, presumably because in your view it is not actually established. Can I ask then, if you think there is a body of established knowledge (no quotes) that is established and verified?

And if so, would you say that the majority of what is generally considered known is established, or merely "established"?

A free thinker is a person who will not blindly accept a story based on it's telling, no matter how many people tell him/her the start, middle and end of that story.
A free thinker will evaluate a story and spend enough time trying to marry it up with real life in a logical and common sense manner.

A free thinker will also accept that not all amazing stories are necessarily a fantasy and is willing to search for reasons why it could be.

A free thinker is a person who is not easily intimidated mentally or physically into following mass opinion if his/her mindset is in conflict with that opinion.

A free thinker is a strong willed person. A sceptic. A person that does not readily trust a source until they physically see it for themselves.

However; a free thinker will also accept they can be wrong if there is a more logical explanation to anything they pursue as an alternative to mass opinion; they just will not readily do it under intense pressure of ridicule and are more likely to be more sceptical due to that.

A genuine free thinker will continually explore all avenues and constantly alter theories as each piece of a puzzle starts to change.

A free thinker will spend their entire lives piecing together rather than be handed a painted picture of what they are told is reality - a reality that they do not recognise away from that canvass.

A free thinker is a strong willed person. A sceptic. A person that does not readily trust a source until they physically see it for themselves.

And how about things you cannot actually observe directly?

they just will not readily do it under intense pressure of ridicule and are more likely to be more sceptical due to that.

But this means you allow public opinion and pressure to influence your reasoning - making your thinking decidedly unfree.

I believe a free thinker is someone who cares enough to think at all.

A free thinker is a person who will not blindly accept a story based on it's telling, no matter how many people tell him/her the start, middle and end of that story.
A free thinker will evaluate a story and spend enough time trying to marry it up with real life in a logical and common sense manner.

What about people who work to make sense of the world? The people who learn the basics of mathematics at a young age and build from there? Going from arithmetic to algebra, geometry, trigonometry, calculus, and beyond, realizing that math is the purest form of science and numbers don't lie. And then they apply this knowledge to the real world, performing experiments to see how things really work. Realizing how everything connects because of the foundation of knowledge they have built. Realizing equations put forth by the greatest minds in history really do describe our world.

How do those people compare to oh great free-thinking scepti in his armchair sticking to his rudimentary "common sense"?

Is scepti so skeptical about things that he doesn't believe in his brain cause he hasn't seen it?