Regarding "Individuals for Freethought"

(this is an article I wrote for the Kansas State University Collegian)

Regarding “Individuals for Freethought”

Recently, I saw an advertisement for a group here on campus. It read something like, “Don't believe in God? Neither do we! Individuals for Freethought”, then it went on to give the time and place of the next meeting for this particular group. According to the group's website, Freethought is, “thinking without the restraints of religious dogma, 'revelation,' authoritarianism, tradition, or prejudice.” To be a freethinker, one must reject these things. They claim that, “freethinkers use reason and science to form their own conclusions about morality and the nature of the universe.” In order to make the position clear, the website tells the reader that Freethought is different from free thought in that Freethought is “a historical tradition of thought and discourse that traces primarily back to the Enlightenment and combines free thought with doubt or disbelief regarding supernatural views, particularly traditional religions” whereas free thought is merely “critical reflection” and that “many reflective people are free thinkers in this sense, including many religious believers.”

It seems to me that the main premise of this group is hopelessly illogical. The group which claims to reject dogma, in fact, has a dogma of their own. They declare that, in order to be a Freethinker, one must subscribe to the idea that dogmas are merely a “restraint” to coming to “conclusions about morality and the nature of the universe.” What good, then, is the group? They depend on a dogma to restrain their members, and then decry the restraint dogma places on people. In the FAQ section of their website, we find yet another fallacy. They claim on the main page that “tradition” is another “restraint” on those who are not members of their group. However, as quoted earlier, they tell us that Freethought itself is a “historical tradition”. Tradition and dogma are not wrong in and of themselves. If they are true, why should one not give them intellectual assent? On the issue of using reason to come to conclusions, I think it's important to note that reason alone can never be sufficient. Using reason to prove that reason can lead someone to truth is a circular argument. A person must have faith that reason can lead him or her to the truth.

I would like to outline my views so that the reader can more readily understand why I have a problem with this group's position and why I am writing this. I am a strict Catholic. I believe all dogmas held and taught by the Catholic Church. Also, I accept Darwin's evolution and the Big Bang theory (a theory put forth by a Catholic priest named Monsignor Georges-Henri Lemaitre). I harbor no hatred toward the members of other religious sects or schools of thought. I may disagree with other people, but I defend their right to disagree. However, I am no philosophical relativist. I believe that there is an objective reality, an objective Truth. I believe Catholic dogmas because they are firmly based on both faith and reason. I do not believe them because I have been told to or because I am incapable of understanding other viewpoints. My religious beliefs and my views on science are not in contradiction. I prefer to let science describe the things science intends to describe and theology/philosophy describe the things they intend to describe. Science does not intend to describe morality; therefore to ask science to do so is asking something it cannot answer. In the same way, theology and philosophy do not intend to describe the physical world and to ask this of theology or philosophy is asking something outside of their scopes.

What is the point of all this? My goal with this article is to persuade the reader to be critical of the things you read and hear. Analyze the beliefs of groups you are considering joining, analyze your own beliefs. Discuss your views with your friends, family, peers, and professors. If another person's viewpoint holds up to a rigorous logical test, consider adopting it. In your consideration, do your own research. Find things out for yourself. No one can be forced to believe anything. Exercise your ability as an individual to think freely.