Freedom, Accountability and the Thinking Being

My biology teacher from Form 3 says homosepiens means "thinking man" or in the modern understanding of the language "thinking person". But historically having independent thought was seen to be a dangerous idea.

The powers that be were worried, "What if they think the 'wrongly'?" or worse, "They will convince others of their 'wrong' ideas?". Hence, even as the shackles were loosened on the freedom of thought other controls remain to limit the freedom. To borrow (and twist) the words of Voltaire, man was born to think freely but everywhere he think only within the limits of his beliefs.

Most ideology - whether religious, political, social or intellectual - sought to separate the 'good' from the 'bad' and 'right' from 'wrong'. And there are various ways to control how people think: through the force of law and persecution on the one extreme, to peer pressure, to guilt and shame. Mostly the way we think is simply result of social conditioning. We were given a template view of reality and we simply ... stopped thinking. Most of us were simply lulled into unthinking ignorance.

I am reminded of a conversation with my new office-mate - a German chap named Kai. I do not remember what we were talking about but he told me that - above all else - the German education system is based on everyone thinking and acting based on their own decisions. Given their recent history, it is frowned upon to be agreeing or doing something just because someone else says so. I have not met enough Germans to make my own assessment of how well that is working in reality, but I believe it is laudable as a starting point.

So let me introduce a different perspective to your posting that there should be rules on religious freedom, I'd submit that rules limiting thinking or ideas (I put religion as an idea or thought) is actually the default setting for much of human history. The trouble starts when different groups try to impose their ideas on others. Intolerance cannot be distinguish by whether it is rooted in politics, race, social conditions or religion, for they all rely on division and mobilization of the unthinking and ignorant through fear and hatred by convincing them that they are more “right” than all the others.

And I believe the answer to intolerance and divisive ideology lies in the thinking being. The issue, my friend, is not that there is too much freedom of religious thinking and too little limits. On the contrary, my contention is that there is not enough thinking and hence, people get lulled by religion into conditioned reflexes and into imposing their own "limits" on what others should be allowed to think.

History has taught us again and again how dangerous the state of unthinking ignorance is. Any ideology be it religious, political, social or intellectual are mainly the creation of human thoughts and this state of unthinking ignorance is being exploited again and again to the present day causing the suffering of millions. Surely, one would think, that kind of outcome could not be 'right'. A note here: although I believe in 'larger' spiritual energies of wisdom and intelligence that are above you and me, but I find the practice of religions to be full of human follibies.

Liberal education in the sense of one that encourages wide-ranging intellectual exploration, encourages original thought, critical thinking and robust testing of ideas ... is actually a fairly old idea giving rise to many of the world's great philosophies. A liberal education is associated with the idea of an 'educated' or 'learned' person. Although it may be tougher or more lucrative to be a chartered accountant, one tend not to think of them when asked to describe someone "learned". (For lawyers, the answer is "yes of course"). But historically, being expected to think tended to be the preserve of the few and not for the person in the street.

Even the very idea that everyone should be educated is a relatively new concept. Even for a society where education is so revered and so key to worldly success as in ancient China, few families could afford to educate their children. In most other societies, education meant knowing the holy books or religious texts, often in the hope of being clerics as rabbis, priests, Brahmins, magic doctors etc. The idea of a secular education was scandalous, the idea of a liberal education where basic ideas can be open to question unspeakable!

Is there room for religion in this? Strangely, yes. I would argue but the approach to religion need to be secularized. True, there may be issues where logic and reason can go no further, and perhaps, one need to trust in a higher being. But religion lulls the discussion into unquestioning dogma and simply allows the divine to become an excuse for non-thinking and lack of human responsibility.

So my suggestion is to encourage more reasoned thinking/ action, intellectual exploration and personal responsibility for own actions; and at the same time, acceptance of questioning and debate (hence the possibility that one may be wrong), respect for differences (hence accepting moderation) and faith in humanity (hence get away from wanting to control and remake others). The key lies within the thinking person being responsible for his own thoughts and his own actions