View Full Version : The True Dangers of Thinking Freely
phenethylamine
23-06-2005, 15:42
I have compiled a list... of the true dangers that come to you through thinking for yourself. Here they are...
Also theseEdited by: uqlfy
And i see nothing... is that the true danger of thinking freely? nothing? im confused http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/smileys/smiley5.gif
Muirner
Yep nothing is the true danger. Its like "performance art". I was playing along with Phen on this one.
Actually there is whole bunch of danger in thinking for
yourself. Take Galileo or Copernicus. Or Martin Luther King Jr and
Abraham Lincoln.Very freethinkers also very dead.
phenethylamine
25-06-2005, 23:50
It is true, the pattern of great thinkers in human history being jailed and/or killed for their not so submissivebeliefstends to repeat itself. However, true dangers are only true to you depending on how big you look at the picture of life and its dangers. A quote frommaynard, "We are eternal, all this pain is an illusion"As I would definately not enjoy being thrown in jail, I do believe that if it were to come down to it (again) I would (again) be able to look at it as such, an illusion.
sands of time
26-06-2005, 00:22
Free thinkers face all sorts of dangers. By thinking freely, you are alienating youself from the masses. By standing out in this way, you may become an easy target for those who may not agree with you.
Of course there is always the danger of the masses turning on you. Another danger is the thought itself. Consider this, you are the first person to discover absolute unequivocal proof that there is alien life( the ET kind). Knowing this it makes your life on this earth seem pointless, we are not unique anymore.
Or what about the danger you pose to others by your pursuit of knowledge? Do you think that the team of scientists who builtTHE BOMBhttp://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/smileys/smiley34.gif would do it all over again? When Nobel saw the terrible uses his invention of dynamite was put to he started the Nobel Peace Prize with his profits.
Hitler was a freethinker. Look at what happened with that. Edited by: uqlfy
sands of time
26-06-2005, 04:25
*Of course there is always the danger of the masses turning on you. Another danger is the thought itself. Consider this, you are the first person to discover absolute unequivocal proof that there is alien life( the ET kind). Knowing this it makes your life on this earth seem pointless, we are not unique anymore.
*Or what about the danger you pose to others by your pursuit of knowledge? Do you think that the team of scientists who built*THE BOMBhttp://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/smileys/smiley34.gif would do it all over again? When Nobel saw the terrible uses his invention of dynamite was put to he started the Nobel Peace Prize with his profits.
* Hitler was a freethinker. Look at what happened with that.
Hitler a free thinker??? Absolutely not. He was an insecure follower. He got his racist ideas from the people he met in Austria and Germany. During the 20's and 30's, there was alot of racism against Jews in western Europe and Hitler basicly believed what people told him. Hitler also was the worst thing for free thinkers in Europe, because he killed anyone who did not follow in his beliefs. He was they're mandatory god. It seemed suspicious for a family in Germany not to own a copy of Mien Kempf during that time. He came to power by killing those of the opposing political parties. Hitler was the product of many bad ideas in Austria and Germany.
Edited by: sands of time
Ok Sands,Hitler wasnt the best example. The Eugenics movement was started in California. This group of scientists put forth their views on culling "undesirables" from the human race based on Darwins survival of the fittest. Hitler was influenced by them as well.It would seem to meby your reasoning I could safelyargue that Plato was just a clone of Socrates or that Thomas Jefferson was only copying Voltaire.
I still say he was a freethinker(evil though he was). In a country split apart by war, occupied by the allies and under great economic stress he was able to unite that nationthen create a new political infrastructure. This was not something IMO that could have been done byjust another cow following the herd. As a matter of fact his political strategys are still emulated today.
But I digress, Iwas only illustrating howoften times thinking for oneself carries danger for not just yourself but also for others. Would you agree with that at least?
Edited by: uqlfy
sands of time
26-06-2005, 05:33
I see what you are saying, but I would still say Hitler united the country through brutality and his amazing speech making abilities. I see what you mean by free thinkers though, they're intentions are not always pure. And I dont think I would consider Thomas Jefferson to be a free thinker. Most great political figures are not free thinkers, but that doesn't mean they weren't great historical firgures. I think historical figures should be judged based on they're impact on history.
ritualkiller
26-06-2005, 06:29
They always kill the good guys.
Edit... I better stay out of this one, too close to politics for comfort.Edited by: Nicaine
I see what you are saying, but I would still say Hitler united the country through brutality and his amazing speech making abilities. I see what you mean by free thinkers though, they're intentions are not always pure. And I dont think I would consider Thomas Jefferson to be a free thinker. Most great political figures are not free thinkers, but that doesn't mean they weren't great historical firgures. I think historical figures should be judged based on they're impact on history.
Fair enough Im content to agree that we disagree on persons so long as we agree on the principle of the matter which it seems we do.
So how would define a "free thinker"? Could you maybe name one or two? Im curious as to your opinion on those.
In 399 BC Socrates was put to death because of hisviews. He had to drink a cup of poison. There where and will be many free thinkers who follow him. Although thinking freely may not be to dangerous, speaking freely may be. What do you think is more important: a long life span or to be yourself? Saying what you think is part of being yourself.
Nagognog2
27-06-2005, 04:42
Name two? Okay: Mohandas(The Mahatma) Ghandi. Stephen Biko. Edited by: nagognog2
sands of time
27-06-2005, 05:23
I see what you are saying, but I would still say Hitler united the country through brutality and his amazing speech making abilities. I see what you mean by free thinkers though, they're intentions are not always pure. And I dont think I would consider Thomas Jefferson to be a free thinker. Most great political figures are not free thinkers, but that doesn't mean they weren't great historical firgures. I think historical figures should be judged based on they're impact on history.
*Fair enough Im content to agree that we disagree on persons so long as we agree on the principle of the matter which it seems we do.
*So how would define a "free thinker"? Could you maybe name one or two? Im curious as to your opinion on those.
With my limited historical understanding, I will attempt to name some. John Locke, though his ideals may have been derived from others of his time, Karl Marx, maybe even Charles Manson. I'm sure a person smarter than I could could argue that these were not freethinkers, but o well.
In 399 BC Socrates was put to death because of hisviews. He had to drink a cup of poison. There where and will be many free thinkers who follow him. Although thinking freely may not be to dangerous, speaking freely may be. What do you think is more important: a long life span or to be yourself? Saying what you think is part of being yourself.
Standing on the backs of giants we see further than they. Its a bastardized quote that comes to mind.
Free-thought and free-speech go almost hand in hand. If on has the courage to think for oneself it is almost a prerequisite to havethe courage to speak ones mind.
What you think is what you are. I am not ashamed to be me. There have been times in my life when it was prudent to not speak my mind else others may have suffered. I would remain silent before my actions harm another. Yet by that same token I would not recant.
I would gladly swallow that cup of hemlock rather than live as a coward.My death would prove my conviction.Were I to live it would only serve to discredit me.
phenethylamine
27-06-2005, 18:09
I would gladly swallow that cup of hemlock rather than live as a coward. My death would prove my conviction. Were I to live it would only serve to discredit me.
Yes, this is what I am speaking of
neat, hey i'm not a hitler fan but most of what you know about him is
fabricated bs-search out alternative history, or true history all of our text
books are based on bs, history never happened as it is told in school books,
Bruce lee was a free thinker, example-
Notice that the stiffest tree is most easily cracked, while the bamboo or willow survives by bending with the wind.
If you always put limit on everything you do, physical or anything else. It will spread into your work and into your life. There are no limits. There are only plateaus, and you must not stay there, you must go beyond them.
I'm not in this world to live up to your expectations and you're not in this world to live up to mine.
these are all by Bruce Lee, but just few of many
oh yea and to the guest, ur right, history is written by the victorious not the losers.
http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/smileys/smiley2.gifpeace.
We will always be unique just for our thoughts alone. No one thing or person is exactly the same as another. There will always be something, no matter how minute, that will be different. Differences at least prevent boredom but can oftentimes start wars as well. There is more danger in not being able to think freely than there is in freethinking. The world would be a nation of robots if people were programmed to all think the same or were forced to inhibit their thinking because of the threat of death.