Stop Having an "Open Mind"
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 сен 2024
- SOCIAL MEDIA
Newsletter: breakingintheh....
Facebook: goo.gl/UoeKWy
Instagram: goo.gl/ShMbhH
Podcast: feeds.libsyn.c...
INTERESTED IN BECOMING A FRIAR?
United States: goo.gl/MXKb2R
Find your Vocation Director: goo.gl/2Jc52z
SUPPORT THE MISSION
Order my books: amzn.to/386QDpR
Donate Monthly: goo.gl/UrrwNC
One-time gifts: shorturl.at/4CwgV
MUSIC
Epidemicsound.com
aka "Don't let your mind be so open that your brain falls out."
I like the way Simon Green put it. Paraphrasing, he said that an open mind is a dangerous thing because you never know what might crawl in.
This is ridiculous. The destination is death. So try to enjoy the journey. Christianity is not the response, you don't make up the answer because it's unknowable.
@@amandastjohn4735 that's only a concern if the person has bad reasoning skills/logic... Which takes a lot of self awareness to see if it's a internal weakness.
Yes! United Methodist Church's slogan is "Open mind, Open Heart, Open Door." That's not truly Wesley's theory of Theology.
@@joshuataylor3550i think you misunderstand him. The destination he's talking about is any conclusion. His conclusion is Christianity. Someone else's could be Islam or Paganism. These are all conclusions. He is saying there is a risk you will be wrong, but at least you made a comitment to something.
I love when videos have questionable titles but are actually pretty reasonable
Nothing about this video is reasonable. He starts out by extolling the merit of the saying, then tells you that actually it is all stupid, no one should do it and no one IS doing it. The latter is particularly egregious, because it is bletantly false. A lot of people treat Life as a learning experience and try to actively avoid godmas, because dogmas by their very nature cannot and must not be questioned.
He effectively calls being close minded and resistent to evidence a virtue!
I would change those "questionable titles", this one included, to increase the chances that people aren't put off by them and simply pass on the video.
@@Alexander_Kale to my understanding, he's saying that "keeping an open mind" is generally a good thing, but one must be careful not to accept or tolerate inherently negative things in the name of openness. Say you come across an ancient tribe whose traditions and habits seem harmful to you. from a post-modern way of thinking, which has become increasingly prevelant in the West in recent decades, you might say the right thing to do would be to respect the tribe's traditions, and not think we know better simply because we come from a more technologically advanced part of the world. And to some extent, such humility can be a good thing - but when you let it consume your entire world view, you run the risk of accepting inherently bad things in the name of such "tolerence", such as cannibalism, or God forbid r*pe, or even pedo-illia.
@@DiamondBlade11 There is nothing humble about this video either. He starts with explaining the point of his opposition, then tells you taht his opposition is full of nonsense and you should not listen to them, because you should never have a mind so open taht it questions the truth he and others like him tell you, that being the truth called religion.
He is calling for you to accept religion as the default, as the unquestioning truth, and he ridicules those that seek a truth of their own. To take up your last point, religion and tribalism is one of the premier motivations and justifications behind doing really, really evil stuff. Just look into the bible and count the occasions where something really horrible was done in the name of god and declared good by default.
THAT is where the open mind comes in - and where religion tells you that you should shut up, stop thinking and have faith instead.
@BritishRepublicsn also why would you like that? Its dumb clickbait
"To be open minded is nothing. The object of opening the mind, as with opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid." G.K. Chesterton
@levibarros149 problem is, all the closed minded people are convinced their belief is that "solid" so it circles around to being useless and closed minded
If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything
Somebody quoted that an hour before you did.
Just letting you know in case your comment isn't racking up the "likes" the way you thought it would.
Yes and I am glad Martin Luther stood for something.
Yeah, like Christianity.
Today society is like: “you can have a open mind to think only in what i agree”.
That’s quiet part not said out loud ❤
I disagree: liberal democracy holds that we can practice whatever faith we choose and everyone has a duty to support human rights.
We constrain if not punish folk who denigrate Jews, Roman Catholics, Muslims, etc.
We don't negotiate this matter. We are resolute.
@@russellmiles2861well said, I pray to Lord Jesus and Mama Mary and I hope the past doesn't happen anymore where people are violently abused by the church and state united.

Yep, the average religious mindset throughout history, and even today.
@@Bodrikutya2 "all of too much are bad, it's like a bomb and blowted balloon that will explode"
Self control is the solution.
It’s important to be open-minded such that you allow new knowledge
into your mind with discernment. However, being too open-minded is bad because when you stand for everything, you stand for nothing.
Being open minded doesn't mean standing for everything, it's being open to the possibility that you could be mistaken about the things that you do stand for.
@@downenout8705yes!!! Every open minded person I know (including me) are open minded for this reason. We were all once very close minded, prideful, sure of ourselves, and thought we held the ultimate truth. Then something happened in our lives that really humbled us and made us realize we don’t know anything! We have decided that the person in front of us is far more important than arguing about silly things. We are always open to knew information so that we can continue learning and growing.
Thank you, Father Casey, for this much needed corrective. A mind not tempered by certain standards of reason and morality is not something that should be lauded. A mind not fettered by some boundaries of logic and standards of right and wrong is one that is susceptible to any absurdity and is willing to condone any atrocity under the guise of inclusivity.
It really seems like you're saying open minded when you really mean indecisive. Being open minded doesn't mean not coming to a conclusion; it means being open to new information and being willing to reconsider the conclusion.
Exactly my thoughts! You can be open-minded and at the same time sure of your conclusions to the extent your current knowledge and judgement permit. It is the open mind and the striving to truly understand, among other things, which allow you to change your conclusions if the new input thwarts your previous view. Even though it may be (emotionally, mentally, relationally) hard. Also, open-minded =/= having unstable, insecure too frequently fluctuating opinion; I'm not even sure that is seriously possible (i mean a situation where the "fluctuating opinion" does not stem from insecurity or ignoring previously learned info).
He did clarify himself.
Yes, and I think that's the point he was making in the video. Agnostics can't make up their mind on whether or not god exists. And that's fine. The problem is when they remain there forever. I used to be agnostic, but at one point, when presented with meaningful evidence, I converted to Christianity. However, I've met many agnostics who are afraid of converting to any religion because they don't want to put their trust in something they can't be 100% sure about, even if there is good evidence. And I think he's speaking to those people. He's urging people to take a leap of faith and believe in *something*, because we cannot remain indecisive about who God is forever.
Or noncommittal.
Agreed, it felt like he was talking about people with more disinterest and uncommitedness towards things, rather than a lack of claiming absolute certainty (I guess this is reasonable to claim for not doing genocide, but he used the most extreme example possible)
Being mature person who's just begun the conversion process (been going to mass a year and started RCIA last month) I can agree that the destination matters. Ive spent a lifetime questioning and wondering, having an open mind...it doesnt really go anywhere. Its also a bit lazy, you can 'kick tyres' and pretend you are 'doing the work', but you're just fooling yourself. Once I found the beauty of the mass, the ritual, the tradition, the room for questions but also some answers (at last!!!!) I felt as though I had solid ground under my feet, finally!! I also want to say that when I fist discovered this channel I assumed it was for the younger generation and perhaps a bit glib, but I was so very mistaken. Dont judge a book by its cover huh?!!! This is now one of my favourite channels, thank you Father Casey :D
Thought-provoking video. One of my dearest friends is an atheist. When it comes to religion, he doesn't have an open questioning mind at all. He's also one of the finest human beings I've ever known (and I'm 65). He's committed to being kind to others, to rejecting judgement (it's harder than it sounds) and to living his life to a high moral standard while remaining playful and creative. I realize that he's rare but he's an example of how one can be a very decent human being without religious beliefs.
I love your soft tone but firm stance on truth. Many people think that it is intellectually honest to say you don’t know something and many times it is. But to say nothing can be known or to give up on the pursuit of that truth entirely is cowardice or apathy.
i love this comment
@@dursty3226 thank you 😊
As someone who grew up in a Catholic family, but had been agnostic most of my life, I made the decision to really look into spiritual practices over the past 2 years. I spoke with religious leaders from various faiths, read dozens of texts on Christianity, Catholicism, Buddhism, Hinduism, and other faiths. After seeking answers for a long time, I found a spiritual practice that has helped to dramatically improve my mental health and overall wellness.
I have found that Buddhism is wonderful way of approaching spirituality in my life. The teachings in the Suttas are incredibly insightful. The law of dependent origination, The five precepts, the entire idea of impermanence, It truly spoke to me on a profound level. In fact, I would argue that my interactions with a Buddhist monk that I have had over the last 2 years completely changed my life. He probably saved my life to be perfectly honest. I was, in a terrible place. And while I'm still not well, Buddhism as a spiritual practice helped to pull me back from the brink.
I still love and respect all faiths, and I still believe in God (which I understand is contrary to much of Buddhism, including the idea of impermanence), but the thing I found wonderful about Buddhism is that it's not trying to convert me. There was no pressure, no threats of eternal damnation, no judgment. They basically said to use what I learn to be a better person, and whether or not I end up formerly becoming a Buddhist or not, well that's entirely up to me, and they would be happy to have me in the monastery regardless.
I found this acceptance, kindness, and non-judgments to be so different from what I had experienced before. So I took refuge in the three gems.
Namo buddhaya 🙏
An agnostic theist is a very rare breed, I found your post interesting, but not persuasive.
You should research Emanuel Swedenborg.
While nice in theory, in the math equation of life the Buddhist is off to the side and coloring.
Interesting. There's certainly something to be said about people being drawn to the spiritual experience, and I believe all religions offer that. However, I would say the eternal condemnation stuff or trying to convert others is not inherently bad, assuming you are speaking the truth. Think about it like if you saw a friend living an unhealthy lifestyle, wouldn't you warn your friend? Pressure and "threats" don't detract from the truth and vice versa, as long they are done lovingly (which I admit many Christians don't do that). Not saying even in the slightest bit that is THE REASON you believe in Buddhism, but it is something I found interesting about your experience and story. I also find interesting about how you still believe in a God. As someone who knows a lot of Buddhists, this is definitely something I can't wrap my mind around.
@@louiszhang3050 Thank you for your thoughtful and interesting comment.
Yes, I do believe in god, and even pray regularly. The monks have indeed discussed with me that in Buddhism, there is no single, all powerful, creator god. There are many gods, but even these gods which live in the Deva realms are impermanent, they will eventually re-enter the cycle of samsara, as is discussed in the Brahmajala Sutta, which was admittedly one of the more confusing suttas I read over the past year.
They know that I have a strong belief in a creator god, and in Buddhism, this "attachment" is something that might keep me from fully realizing my spiritual path, but they welcome my differing view, and encourage me to keep studying and practicing the teachings that most are helpful for my life and mental wellbeing, even those practices (such as a belief in a creator god) that might be foundational to an Abrahamic perspective.
I thought about this video since it was posted. I consider myself agnostic.
It has less to do with needing to be right and understanding that the world we live in makes the truth we understand full of holes built upon uncertainty. Maybe death makes it clear, but my stance on agnostic thought is a response that while I think truth exists, it doesn’t currently exist in the world we inhabit.
We live in a world where a lie can be just as impactful as truth. We don’t have the ability to divine the truth from the lies of reasoned truth. To me agnosticism allows me to confine believing there is a truth despite the fact that the world today doesn’t allow us to see that truth. Nobody remains true to themselves 24/7. Being agnostic allows me the ability to climb up from falls from grace; something I value more than a a belief in a false sense of truth.
I am not going to pretend I know anything. Agnosticism is a choice that allows me to know where I land to climb back up. I would rather be in the jungle than with the worshipers of idols and followers of things.
I believe there are supernatural oddities; I can’t help be reticent that most of the world tries to believe in lies. I think there is something, but believing in the lies only builds up a worldview that is at odds with the truth of the world as a whole.
You don't have to commit to believing with certainty that anything is true. If something seems very likely to be true you can live pragmatically as though it's true while still keeping an open mind.
This is just what I needed to hear after the struggles I had today thank you very much for this message.
What message? To keep blindly believing your religion?
Amen.
I've been sitting on the fence about a lot of things, and that often frustrates me because as I get deeper into my 20's, I need that fundamental understanding within me to know what's the truth.
I need it.
Yesterday I was praying to God. After following Christ for three years in college, I graduated and has had a lot of time to think about my faith. The thought lingers in my brain like it never disappears, "how do you know Jesus is the ONLY way?" I wanted to research other religions but I know I'll never fully capture the way people following other religions think. But I know I shouldn't be completely ignorant either. I prayed, "Father, show me how to find the middle ground." Then this video popped up. It really helps me to remember that faith in Jesus is a risk, a scary one at times, yet a reasonable one. Thank you. Even though I'm not Catholic, I can see God is using you and your platform to share the Good News. I hope this comment serves as an encouragement.
What's "scary" about having faith in Jesus?
@@paulcooper8818 The fact that I am putting my whole life out of my own hands and giving it into the hands of Jesus. I know "Jesus is the one who is far better shepherd of my life than I will ever be" statement. And I would agree. But sometimes when you lack faith to truly trust that and doubt, it becomes hard to have faith in Jesus.
@@louiszhang3050 Yes I can relate why that is scary, thank you for answering.
How do you know faith is Jesus is reasonable? Is faith other religions like Islam reasonable?
@@tomandrews1429 Hi friend, the reason why I believe in Jesus is through personal experience. And I'm not talking some one time miracle (though that's what convinced me to become Christian to begin with), but the fact that reading the Bible dismantled many lies I believed as an atheist, the appeal to logic that I saw through Christianity, and the faithfulness of God that I personally saw through my life. Can other religions claim the same thing? Well, I'd argue Abrahamic religions like Islam and Judaism certainly can. And I'm not going to try to disprove them because I will never understand Islam like a Muslim or Judaism like a Jew. While evangelizing, I've talked to Muslims before and listened to why they believe in what they believe. Personally, I'm not convinced. Could I be convinced by them one of these days? Perhaps, but for today and tomorrow, I'm content with Christ as I have been these past several years. Not trying to debate, just showing why I believe in what I believe. Have a blessed day.
I am agnostic but I don't intend on being that way forever. I agree with you that it would do no good to never come to any conclusion.
I personally don't shun any answers or those who claim to know them. I know that agnostics sometimes think they're just better than everyone. I don't consider the idea of god to be "foolish" or "wrong" I'm just not sure if it is the right conclusion.
Meh, I'll figure it out eventually though.
I find it great you're seeking for the truth, I'm a Christian, if you have any questions or want to have a dialogue or a calm debate I'll be here. Shalom. ❤
I appreciate your honesty. It's hard to be 'closed-minded', or too 'open-minded' I think there should be a balance between humility and confidence. It's important to use our rational mind, as God has given us. The intention of how you search for truth. Most people use contemporary ideas to formulate their beliefs and worldview. To use a certain framework that fits the current culture, instead searching for themselves. actual objective truth and beauty.
Eventually you have to choose a room in the house of meaning. But don't be afraid to stay in the corridor for awhile. but don't lose heart and keep actively searching, visiting rooms. I think that it is tempting to stop searching and indefinitely stay in the corridor. But it is absolutely paramount that you ground yourself. It is crucial because this search of meaning and truth has dire consequences that everyone will experience eventually: Death.
May God guide you to the truth.
The problem for agnostics is the conundrum that the God vs science debate presents. The people who support religion rely on the Faith Hypothesis wherein they say we don’t have proof, we have faith. The advocates of science scoff at the faith hypothesis and point to the evidence based truth of scientific discoveries especially in biology (Darwin), anthropology, and cosmology. Enlightened religious scholars readily accept the scientific evidence, but attribute the findings to the hand of God rather than random selection. A question that seemingly never gets asked of the scientific community is where is your proof? Even today, the discoveries of the James Web telescope are causing huge questions about the Big Bang origin story. It appears that there were parts of the universe that existed before the Big Bang. So many questions that current “theory” doesn’t explain and no evidence-based truth. So, scientists are relegated to relying on their “faith” that there are scientific explanations for these mysteries. People of religious faith have long ago accepted that God is the keeper of the truth and wild speculative theories are unnecessary. The agnostic is caught in the intellectual middle with nowhere to go. From my perspective, the choice is clear: choose the path of God because not only does it lead to peace and fulfillment here and now, but it promises eternal peace and fulfillment. Can I prove that? No, but I have faith. What does the alternative “faith-based” system offer? Only continuing “discoveries “ that disprove or cause to doubt existing theories (not evidence), just theories. Good luck with your quest.
Seek truth not faith.
“Having faith is believing in something you just know ain't true.” -- Mark Twain
As someone who is currently in the Inquiry stage with the Catholic Church, I really needed to hear this. Thank you.
So, as an agnostic atheist, I would probably disagree on a singular point. We generally do praise people who hold claims to certain things, and can provide evidence for those claims. When we discovered the CMBR, we praised the Catholic who did, and rightfully so, he deserved that praise for holding firm to the belief that the universe we know to day at one point came from a singularly dense point. But making claims of which there are things we can't know beyond reasonable doubt seems, well, unreasonable to me. I know my spouse and friends love me because of the actions they repeatedly take to affirm that love. Could they secretly not love me and curse my name behind my back? Sure. I discount that possibility because I view it to be extraordinarily low, and I have a mountain of other evidence to the contrary. With God, it seems to me that I will never really have an answer to that question, unless He comes down and shows himself to me. He has not, so I will not believe. No matter how hard I search, or what arguments I hear, I still feel fundamentally unconvinced. Any stance I would choose to hold would just feel wrong, and so I'll remain undecided.
Belief in things for which there is very little empirical evidence requires an open mind. I can kind of agree with Fr. Casey, in that agnostics can come off as cowards. However, there is some things we do not know. And, sometimes, the most courageous thing is to admit that we do not know them. The journey towards a sinless life may still be worth taking even if you will never get there.
"Belief in things for which there is very little empirical evidence requires an open mind."
That sounds more like *_faith_* than an open mind.
@@paulcooper8818 Fr. Casey says that what he likes about an open mind is that it means always seeking and learning. It's the seeking that makes me suspicious. If you are seeking something specific, you are almost guaranteed to convince yourself that you have found it at some point. His definition of what an open mind should be seems likely, as you point out, to lead to faith. Which is to say... it is likely to lead one to delude oneself. There really are some things we just don't know. Being forced to commit to something in the absence of knowledge, means you have forced yourself into an unjustified faith.
@@gfxpimp To me being open minded is to evaluate new information even when it may disagree with you currently hold true. Evaluating doesn't mean it has to be accepted, but if it fits the data it may require one to change their mind.
When it comes to spirituality and metaphysics, no matter what -- most people will be wrong.
For people of faith, like Fr. Casey, being open minded seems to mean something more. They would accept your definition and add a little more to it.
Father, I’ve had this discussion several times over with many people since college and you are the first person to give me a good answer.
This is the message we needed. Everyone has dogmas. We need a certain level of confidence. Faith is confidence. It’s how I took the leap from
Agnostic to Catholic over Easter
What about Easter did it for you?
@@paulcooper8818 I was in RCIA and ready to convert. Easter is the resurrection. I thought it was perfect symbolism as I began the rest of my life following Christ
@@AliciatheCho I see, RCIA is something new to me, but I see you were already well on your way to Catholicism. Thanks for answering.
Thank you for this video. I'm an agnostic, and this is how I see my life: I don't wait under the rain for god to prove himself or herself. I pick up an umbrella and then go about my day. If god doesn't show up, cool. If god shows up, cool. I don't wait. It's not indecisive, I think.
This is true. Plus, I've always felt like the 'always be open minded' mindset you're criticising is ironically....kinda close minded and dogmatic
Similar to "Only Sith deal in absolutes"
That's cope from religious people. If people questioned thier religious beliefs with an open mind instead of keeping what was indoctrinated into them since childhood, there'd be 90% less of you. Of course they don't want to accept that, so they pretend that, and this is hilarious from you, that keeping an open mind is closed minded. Bro, really?
Can you describe what you mean when you say "open minded"? because friar casey here botched it hard imo.
I disagree that it is bad to live as an agnostic. I see it as being quite different to how you describe it. I do not believe that there is a deity for many reasons, and nothing that I have come across yet has convinced me otherwise, but I am open to being convinced to the contrary and I hope that if there is one that this convincing will come to me. If you asked me to stand for something, I would stand for no deity, but I think it's better to be open to the possibility that I am wrong. I don't dissent your belief and I think it's a straw man argument to say that the existence of agnostics somehow belittles believers.
An open mind unfortunately sometimes lead to having a tolerance of everything
LAMOOOOOOOO
I think you may be confusing tolerance with acceptance. Acceptance means allowing things to slide without question or letting them affect your emotional state because the goal is to promote inclusivity. Tolerance means just putting up with or enduring something. You can tolerate something and still not like it or agree with it.
@MrPjw5 Yes, but how much or how long does one have to endure before tolerance becomes acceptance?
@@CklertI feel like that’s a you problem.
Regardless, tolerance can have limits. Acceptance, by definition, can’t have any.
No, it doesn't. That is one of the most hyperbolic statements I have ever heard. Absolutely asinine.
It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out.
Carl Sagan
To be open minded about everything is to be close minded about reaching conclusions.
No it isn't. To be open minded is to stay open to the possibility that new evidence might teach you something different to what you currently believe. It doesn't stop you forming opinions or beliefs in the meantime. Are you telling me you've never changed your mind about anything when new information came to light?
@@seantaylor4095 Yes, I’ve changed my mind about many things. I was an atheist for most of my adult life, for example. But I came to the conclusion that the evidence for classical theism is stronger than the evidence for atheistic naturalism. The point is that we can’t be RADICALLY open minded about everything. Radical skepticism precludes the possibility of any knowledge at all.
@@blakemoon123 Being open minded isn't about indecisiveness, it's about being receptive to new information. Indecisiveness is the inability to use whatever information you have to reach a conclusion, regardless of how open or close minded you are. To assume that being open minded means you can't reach a conclusion about something simply suggests an incapacity to apply a personal filter to what information you choose to believe.
Radical anything is bad, it goes without saying but the 'radical' open mindedness you describe simply doesn't exist. No-one believes everything they are told and changes their mind every time they talk to someone different. If it exists at all it's within the realms of extreme religious cults that brainwash their victims.
Generating a fervour around 'radical open mindedness' is simply a dog-whistle tactic to recruit more people to the close mindedness of religion. He almost said as much in the video (and the video title also betrays this intent).
On a separate point. I'd be interested to know what evidence you weighed when coming to your personal conclusion. The evidence I would require to dismiss the natural in favour of the supernatural would need to be pretty compelling.
This video is a breath of fresh air in a world that often glorifies endless questioning. It's especially helpful for those of us who might find ourselves constantly in this post-modern second-guessing, feeling stuck and unable to make meaningful decisions.
I wonder, though, if the channel's broader goal is to evangelize a context that is culturally Christian but largely non-practicing and even secular. If so, I think it's crucial to effectively address the reasons why so many people have left or don't even engage with the Church. Reputable studies suggest that it's not because they disagree with fundamental Christian values like love, hope, faith, prudence, temperance, justice, or even with a belief in God or other core tenets... Instead, many see the Church as hypocritical. They perceive us as misogynistic, homophobic, abusive, rich, clerical, centralized, and ultimately participating in the perpetuation of patriarchal and colonial systems that have led to much abuse and injustice, and unable to bear witness to what it preaches. I'm not saying that this is the reality, but one must really pay attention. These are serious accusations that cannot be ignored or dismissed.
To truly invite people, we need to listen with open hearts and minds, not just to defend our own beliefs. We need to practice the Ignatian principle of "presupposing good intentions" and acknowledge that the Spirit is already at work in their hearts, even if their words are challenging or critical. This requires spiritual freedom, real humility, and the openness to accept that our understanding of the world, the Church and God, may even need to evolve (as it always does!). Only then can we begin to bridge the gap and build trust with those who have felt hurt and alienated. Only then can we bear true witness to God's presence in our lives.
I respectfully disagree that a journey needs to have a destination in mind. Yes, we should have destinations and goals in general. But I think there is absolutely merit to journeying without having a destination in mind. That doesn't necessarily mean you don't reach anywhere. Quite the opposite, you might reach somewhere you had never even considered as a possibility. Journeying for a destination and journeying simply to journey both have their place, I don't think it is an either or.
No matter where you go, there you are
I grew up without any religion pushed on me. My family is full of historians, so I learned about the history of every mainstream religion (some religions more than others). Because of this, I am agnostic (I do believe we were created by something) . Questioning everything is how I'm wired. I refuse to put blind faith in anything. All religions have their own "evidence" to show their God is the "true God." I've learned your religion mainly depends on where you are born. Some say I'm damned, some say I'm not, and others say it doesn't matter at all. I'll find out when I die ig.
Have you ever questioned your questioning or the apparent objective reality we live in? Most people who "question everything", do not in fact question everything.
@stefanmilicevic5322 Actually I have. I go down the rabbit hole of questioning my questioning and why I question what I question and how I go about it. I question my very being and thoughts. However it's quite mentally exhausting, lol.
@@niceguyjake4718 And, what are you main takeaways playing the questioning game ad infinitum? Are you still "refuse to put blind faith in anything."? I hope you know money is a kind of matter of blind faith so thats that.
@@stefanmilicevic5322 You bring up an interesting point. Questioning everything, including my questioning, has led me to some interesting realizations. One of my main takeaways is the acceptance that absolute certainty is nearly impossible to achieve. This doesn't necessarily lead to blind faith but rather a more nuanced understanding that some level of trust or assumption is necessary to navigate life.
Regarding money, I do understand that it's a construct based on collective trust and agreement. Recognizing that doesn’t contradict me but reinforces the idea that we often operate on accepted norms and constructs. I also find it much easier to put "faith" into money and the system that I interact with daily than I do religion.
Ultimately, while I try to question and understand as much as possible, I accept that I will probably never have absolute certainty that God is worth believing in. Still going to question as much as I can. Committing to a belief system (especially one that says if you don't follow it you will be punished enterally) is a big decision that I don't take lightly.
@@niceguyjake4718 That was my intention from the beginning. To recongize that there are certain assumptions to be made and that they are not per se taken on blind faith but rather that they are absolutely nessecary for inquiry and living itself. You are welcome.
Hello! I am an atheist who's watched a couple of your videos now... and I think they're all amazing, they all have great, logical takes on how science interacts with the Bible, and how the Bible does not contradict science, and science does not contradict the Bible (in the catholic view at least 😅)
I just watched your video on "What the Bible says about homosexuality" It was a really cool video, but the comments are turned off, so I was able to ask the question I was hoping to ask, so I wanted to ask it here.
At the end of the video, you talk about how, even though the Bible says homosexuality is wrong, Christians should not take up the action of judging and condemning these individuals for being created the way they are. It's not exactly what you said, but it makes the same point. The phrasing "for being created the way they are" confuses me, if God does not agree with homosexuality, why would he create these people with this attribute set in stone? Did you instead mean, created the way they are, as in, fell victim to the sin of lust?
I'm a fan, but you missed the mark here (for me), Father. "There isn't a person on earth who doesn't hold some truth beyond questioning." Again, for me, this is painting with such a broad brush that that assertion really doesn't "mean" anything. Because the first thing you're going to need to do there is define..."truth" (in the sense you're using it in that assertion). I can see where you're trying to go here, but I don't think you get there.
After the Consecration at Mass, the priest says, "The Mystery of Faith." That word faith is rooted in the Hebrew אמונה ("emunah"), from which we get our "Amen." But in Hebrew, it is not a noun, but a verb, more like "faithfulness", which implies "doing" something. But your point about "decisiveness" or "making a decision", for me, comes too close to acknowledging something akin to "The Truth of our Knowledge"; but our path does not lie in the truth of our knowledge, it lies in "the Mystery of Faith." "I am the way, the truth, and the life..." Yes. But first and foremost (literally) the "way" (the "journey" you seem to be mocking).
Although our theology is grounded in Western philosophy (as is, therefore, our Christianity) that doesn't mean we have to be imprisoned by that tradition (of thought, I mean). And your entire take on this "the journey is the destination" is, at some point, nonsense, is not shared by a vast majority of the world's peoples. Hindus wouldn't share your view here, neither would Confucianists (whose social code governs China, Korea, Japan, Vietnam), nor would Buddhists. And we can learn something from them, not just "impose" our beliefs on them.
For example: I have often found it helpful to think (as most Christians do) of God as "Being" (itself); but I then employ a 20th-century Kyoto School of Philosophy idea that we, say, humans, are not little "beings", plural, but are, rather, "becomings." (This also helps me deflate my "I", my "ego" and replace it with the search for my"Self"). And (again, for me) seeing myself as "becoming" allows me to keep more closely in mind that I am "following" Jesus... on a "path", a "way", which HE is, a.... journey.
So, again, I very much appreciate your impetus here, but this was way too... dryly "dogmatic" for me. 😉
i don't think this was well titled. it's not about the dangers of being agnostic, it's about the problems of never committing to something. which is a good point to make but it's just not issue with agnosticism.
agnosticism is driven by a lack of evidence not conviction
As far as I'm aware that's not really the agnostic view. I'm certain some agnostics would fall under that category but I'm pretty sure most would just say that they're agnostic because it's impossible to know for sure. Not because of a direct hesitancy to come to a conclusion, but rather that the conclusion itself is not present. What I mean by this is that they would believe that if there is a god, that he has not directly revealed himself in a form like religion but rather that he just sits back watching or something along those lines. Not that there isn't a conclusion eventually possible perhaps, but with the knowledge currently at our disposal it is simply not feasible to reach it. I wanna specify that I am in fact a believer in God and not an agnostic but it's important to for our arguments as believers to be sound in their scope. If the arguments we raise are illogical, we're just making our cause harder no?
You’re misrepresenting agnosticism. If I think I don’t hold the truth it does mean I look down on people who have strong feelings about what it is truth. Moreover, as a catholic when I was young I don’t recall having space to think outside the church imposed me.I have no problem with people who believe in talking snakes, but this is religious and has nothing to with reason, but faith. Do not mix up apples with pears.
This is a false dichotomy. Reaching a conclusion and being open minded are not mutually exclusive. I have certainly reached the conclusion that the Earth is round, but I'm still open to being convinced otherwise by sufficient evidence. I don't think it is a good use of my time to actively investigate that question, but if I were presented with clear evidence of a flat Earth, I would change my mind. That is what being open minded means. We don't have to continue to search for answers once we are sufficiently confident in the ones we have, but we should still be open to changing our minds if contrary evidence lands at our feet.
Your genocide example is a little different. Whether genocide is good or bad isn't a factual question, but a moral one. It is a value judgement. You can't convince me that genocide is a good thing by presenting evidence because I didn't come to the conclusion that it is a bad thing based on evidence. I came to that conclusion based on the values that have been instilled in me by the society in which I live. While we do need to be open to changing our values (if we never changed our values, we would still be condoning genocide, as your Bible does), the process is a little different and a little harder to pin down. It isn't an empirical process. I don't think the concept of open mindedness really applies.
Very well said. Thanks for stating the arguments so clearly.
This is a gross mischaracterization of what it is to be open-minded. Being open-minded is not being open to *everything.* Being open minded means being willing to change your thinking when the evidence suggests that your previously held idea was wrong. It does not mean never being willing to come to a conclusion, never being able to commit.
What you are describing is the healthy version of open-minded that I speak of. But just because you hold that view doesn't mean that this is how the world holds it. There are MANY people in our world who scoff at the idea of objective truth. If that's not you, then maybe you just need to see that this video wasn't meant for you.
I think that you may be skewing what sorts of things go into having an open mind. it is not that one doesnt have certainty. It is that one is willing to question that certainty when presented with new evidence and not simply deny that evidence in a knee jerk sort of way.
For example i will not doubt my spouse loves me, but if i find that she has taken out a new insurance policy on me, and has been looking up cheap flights to Mexico, how cyanide tastes, and has baked me an almond torte, when she never has baked before, then, it is best for me to accept that there is new evidence that needs to be considered. Does this mean i need to accept the new evidence just because its new? No, it means i need to accept that it exists and weigh it accordingly
This hit me and cleared up 8 years of my life being wasted in not trying again to commit to anything due to lack of fear of risking that it will all go sideways again. Life isn’t a straight path, sometimes God has you take detours and lets you go through obstacles along the way to not to necessarily derail you but to bring you to your destination. And through Faith we can get there. You’re not really trying if when you lose you don’t feel hurt. If you feel pain on the mission then you’re on the right track because you’re pouring all of you into something like a career.
This puts into words something I’ve been internally thinking for a while
Just had thesame discussion with my wife a few days ago and everything here resonate with it. We were at not taking risks for fear or being wrong and will not be right either. Just stagnant. Thanks for video.
Let us know what you decide.
@@paulcooper8818 We wanna move out of our community and find a place to settle in where we can use our talents to maximum and feel appreciated. She is a nurse and iam a business entrepreneur. Now saving to start the immigration journey soon.
Yeah life seems to be aporetic. It's perfectly possible to accept that condition without giving in to either nihilism or dogma. If we had to wait until we arrive at certainty before we acted, we wouldn't get anything done. I remain in principle open to anything, including all those things you name. In fact most of all those those propositions that seem to me the least tenable, as I'm not sure it requires openness to allow for the possibility of propositions I already hold. I don't see how this is a weakness.
I did not set out on this journey myself. I don't pretend to know where I'm heading or if I'll be among those to arrive. This doesn't require me to be content with not arriving anywhere.
Dear Fr. Casey,
this sums it up why I left church, became an agnostic and will stay so. There is a lot I could reply to each sentence on this one.
It wasn't even my personal experience with the church, but the way I perceived their teaching through my mother. She hat no "open mind" and this video especially with this unrelativizing title brings back my childhood traumas. For her, this core message would stick in her mind: "Open mind" -> bad
As if there are not enough "christians" without an open mind 🥴
Broadmindedness, when it means indifference to right or wrong, eventually ends in a hatred for what is right.
~ Bishop Sheen
"Open minded" people are a lot better at attacking belief systems than they are creating coherent, meaninful world views that take into account all of the wonder and awe of creation and existance. I used to seek out information that challenged my beliefs, but ultimately, this was an unfruitful waste of time.
Why would someone want to challenge their own beliefs? It just makes them uncomfortable. No one wants that.
@@gfxpimp At a certain point you have to decide what you believe and act in accordance with your values. There's plenty more to life than argument.
It's a balance. You should be willing to take in information, but it's also possible to just fall into permanent cynicism and nihilism. One can be too skeptical. I am a mathematician, and even in mathematics you need a good deal of faith. It is definitely possible to nay-say everything until it's impossible to make progress, and some collaborators will do this. You have to be willing to believe your thoughts are leading somewhere even though you don't fully understand what it is. It's much easier to disprove than it is to prove. The best mathematicians will only offer constructive thoughts. If what your collaborator isn't making sense to you, you say nothing unless you can offer something that DOES make more sense. Otherwise you are just halting the process. I think it's similar in all human endeavors. We are so weak that working with partial understanding is pretty much all we have. It's a miracle that we can accomplish so much that way...I think that has a lot to do with the idea of faith.
@@geometerfpv2804 You appear to be talking about brainstorming. Is a faith in a god a form of whimsical brainstorming that you hope will lead somewhere?
Agnosticism is a very admirable position. It is simply being honest about what one doesn't know.
Speculation and hypotheses and even faith have their place, but when we're getting down to the objective, demonstrable brass tacks about the cosmos, humility will never be your enemy.
I hope you see a beautiful flower today😊🌻
Being a seeker only makes sense if you are prepared for the possibility of actually finding something. Many people prefer to remain "seekers" all their life because they either just can't be bothered to actually ponder life's deep questions seriously or they are afraid that finding the answers might mean having to change some things in their life.
Most people happily accept what they were told as children
I would like to point out that, at one point, the church DID believe that the earth was flat, this was dogma. And it did eventually change its position. Dogmas SHOULD be open to challenge as new knowledge is obtained. Hopefully one day the Catholic Church will open its mind to the beautiful natural variation in humans, rather than sticking with its current dogma.
If you have a source for this please share it, otherwise I believe this is wrong. For one, dogmas are reserved to statements about the mystery of God divinely revealed in scripture, so a scientific observation would never be considered a dogma. Beyond that, don’t believe there is a single official teaching promoting the idea that the earth is flat. Ancient people knew that the earth was round, and we have plenty of evidence of medieval theologians speaking of this. It seems like you’re presenting something that sounds like it could be right but has no evidence to support.
The best path for an open mind is to be a skeptic.
Wait a moment, I hope I misunderstood. Who ever told that being open minded means having no conclusions? I have conclusions, and I am open minded, meaning I recognize the possibility my conclusions being wrong. That's what open mindedness is: recognize fallibility. What it doesn't mean is accepting every claim with equal merit, nor having no conclusion to reach.
"Those who stand for nothing, fall for everything"- Idk
He's saying pretend something is true because otherwise you won't be as happy. Not everyone is capable of that and this guy should not judge them. Not everyone has to be happy.
@@joshuataylor3550 but we deserve to strive for happiness.
Wow, that's a 10 out of 10, on the platitude scale
@@paulcooper8818 Your comment is a 10 out of 10, on the snark scale, which is nothing to be proud of, but truth is still truth, even when it's phrased as a platitude.
@@christianman73 The phrase superficially sounds like it's saying something, but when examined for content, it is seen to be just word play.
It's a fear of being wrong about something and looking silly so they stand for nothing.
"At some point, we have to take the risk, and make a claim". I liked that a lot. (as an atheist)
It's a balance. You should be willing to take in information, but it's also possible to just fall into permanent cynicism and nihilism. One can be too skeptical.
I am a mathematician, and even in mathematics you need a good deal of faith. It is definitely possible to nay-say everything until it's impossible to make progress, and some collaborators will do this. You have to be willing to believe your thoughts are leading somewhere even though you don't fully understand where that is. It's much easier to disprove than it is to prove.
The best mathematicians will only offer constructive thoughts. If what your collaborator is saying isn't making sense to you, you say nothing unless you can offer something that DOES make more sense. Otherwise you are just halting the process.
I think it's similar in all human endeavors. We are so weak that working with partial understanding is pretty much all we have. It's a miracle that we can accomplish so much that way...I think that has a lot to do with the idea of faith.
I think we might have a terminology issue, as people who are non-commital are saying they are open mided. As someone who is non-committal, may seem to be open minded, but in truth are not giving it much though. For example if someone asks me my favorite brand of green olives, the answer os I don't have one, mostly because I don't like green olives, so I never gave it a thought on the details of the brand. However, I do have a preferred brand of frozen broccoli, and will commit to that brand. However being open minded, if someone says hey I really like thos other brand, ill check it out to see if I do like it better or not. If I do like that brand better I will switch my commitments to it. However if I don't ill say with the old brand. But if I were asked to get green olives I would probably get whatever is cheapest, because I have no thought on the matter because I won't eat them if I don't have to.
Thank you, well thought out and absolutely worth the time to watch
"The man who stands for nothing will fall for anything," but equally dangerous is never questioning what or why you believe what you believe, or examining your concious.
Edit: Thank you Fr.Casey I loved this video, and you're clear concise wisdom and obvious heart and love for us.
This is the first video in my life that I really LOVE, LOVE, LOVE ❤️ . Thank you! 🙏
Hello, father, Casey. I love your videos. I find them useful and helpful. Your teachings on the eucharist are bibical. I like all the jewls and Gold of the churches and cathedrals. They are magnificent and amazing. Have you heard that there is a new saint among the catholics such as carlo acutis. He is set to become a first Millennial saint. Can you do a video on that topic since it is trending around in the church. Just a recommendation. Take care, and God bless. 🙏🙏🙏
This world has a lot of problems, but too little dogmatism isn’t one of them.
No one is arguing for dogmatism. This video is against agnosticism and relativism.
Father, I know you don’t see yourself as “dogmatic.“ It’s an unpleasant word, and you don’t like to think of yourself that way, even though you serve a church that is famous for its dogmas and doctrines. On the other hand, I don’t particularly like being called “toxic” and hearing that people like me are “destroying our society.” I know many people who have been terribly damaged by the various manifestations of religious faith; agnosticism, by comparison, is really quite benign. Atheists and agnostics are not hurting society, and anyway, we are not nearly as influential as you seem to think.
@@gerardjellison6068 The "killing babies is actually evil" dogma seems pretty reasonable to me, but perhaps you disagree though.
@@davemoore7808 Some dogmas are quite reasonable. Agnosticism is also reasonable. My problem is that this video (perhaps unintentionally) described agnostics as dangerous to society. Vigorously defending your beliefs is fine. Demonizing your opponents is not.
Very well presented. If you stand for nothing you will fall for everything!
Very poorly presented, because it conflated having an open mind with having no opinion on anything when they are clearly not the same thing.
"All that is gold dose, not glitter. Not all who wander are lost. The old who are strong don't wither. Deep roots are not reached by the forest."
J.R.R Tolkien
Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazg gimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul --
J.R.R Tolkien
Thank you for the wisdom, Father.
“An open mind is like an open mouth: you need to close it in order to eat anything.” I think that G. K. Chesterton (and probably others) wrote something to that effect.
An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded
This is exactly what i was looking for, lol
The half-life of knowledge is finite. The joy of an open mind is knowing that things I know to be true can be proved wrong in the future.
“If you tried to doubt everything you would not get as far as doubting anything. The game of doubting itself presupposes certainty.”―Ludwig Wittgenstein, On Certainty
That was discovered by one of the Sophists of ancient Greece, who resolved one day to say nothing of which he was not certain. He found he was reduced to pointing silently with a finger.
But as Christians, are we not seekers? Do we not spend our lives seeking out how we may deepen our faith and understanding of God, what it means to life our faith in our own lives and communities, and many more questions? Even if you have faith, life should never not be about seeking. Being a person of faith doesn’t mean having all the answers. That is exactly the problem with all the ultra conservative priests in my area, preaching to the ultra conservative community about how gay people are evil. All they are doing is affirming those people’s beliefs, and as a result, those people are not growing in faith and understanding. When instead, the priest should preach on a topic challenging the community to look to their own sins and consider how they can do better and grow in their faith. Seeking is an integral part to faith life.
This is why I call my self an atheist and not an agnostic. I came to the conclusion that God or something similar probably doesn't exist so I identify that belief with the label of atheist.
I prefer indifferent; I don't care what anyone else beliefs or what religion or not they practice. That is Father Casey's private business
If we're being honest, we're all 'agnostic'. No one knows, for a certainty, what's absolutely true. That said, it's possible to be agnostic while simultaneously having faith in something. That's why I don't fault people for choosing to believe. I fault them for claiming to know.
I’m with you, but it’s useful to separate what is known due to evidence and what is believed in absence of evidence. The first is gnosis the second is faith. They often sit comfortably next to each other.
@SknappCFA They do, and, again, i don't blame people for having faith. It's just important to make the distinction between faith and knowledge, which is at the heart of agnosticism. As an agnostic, I know only that I don't really know. A lack of absolute knowledge shouldn't discourage people from believing, though. As such, neither will I.
I know there are no gods.
Most people don't want to accept that and I get it.
@@paulcooper8818 So you *cope* by mass replying to comments on a video about religion in the most inane, condescending way possible? You sure sound confident in your beliefs, bro. Keep it up.
@@davemoore7808 I'm not coping, I'm engaging with specific threads. Yes, I'm confident in my reasons for not believing in gods. If you think it is inane then that's on you bro.
Without an open mind we would never have left the caves and we would still be believing that the gods exchanged night and day.
Did you watch the video? If 100% of cavemen kept an open mind on this "fire" thing they wouldn't have frantically worked to keep it going and use it to actually get out of the caves.
@@tafazziReadChannelDescription
What does "keeping the fire" have to do with having an open or closed mind?
With an open mind, what he obtained in the time of the caves was the courage to verify the veracity of phenomena that were previously unknown (or "known" by a false belief without evidence).
@@jtapia0 if you consider anything "verified", you've closed your mind on that topic
@@tafazziReadChannelDescription
@@jtapia0 I'm not dishonest, I'm telling you the simple truth that if you consider anything as "verified", that means you've stopped investigating and reached a conclusion.
You misunderstand what faith is but in my experience it's a boring conversation to have that devolves in me proving your semantics don't make sense, but the atheist refusing to accept they even *might* have a misperceotion of what the word faith means when used by theists. So let's focus on the fact that open mind is mutually exclusive with considering things "verified".
No, I don't think that being open to endless improvement is necessarily unfulfilling. The journey CAN be an end, in this sense.
Yes, we have to stand for what we think is the best, and we need not be open-minded to any absurd. At the same time, we can't know that we have (and most likely we don't have) the ultimate answer; i.e. be open to change your beliefs, your ways, and maybe some of your "dogmas" given new information.
It is possible that I may reach a destination. Who knows?
Agnostic here. I agree with the central idea of the video. In modern western societies neutrality in every aspect tends to become some kind of virtue, something i always disagreed with. For me, someone who tries to achiecve abstinence from as many value/ belief systems as possible isn't a role model of a "free thinking - non dogmatic" person, plus this stance itself can turn into dogmatism.
But on the other hand i don't get if the whole video is a hint against religious agnosticism specifically. At least for me agnosticism is not a product of a desire to question everything, my starting point was being a hardcore atheist before i concluded that agnosticism is the most humble spiritual stance one can have, also when it comes to non spiritual matters i don't have this "agnostic" perspective.
Everyone is a technical agnostic, because no-one knows. I see the term agnostic as being pretty redundant unless someone has no opinions about anything. That means the world is essentially divided into agnostic theists and agnostic atheists. I'm the latter.
Awesome. God bless you Father Casey 🙏🙏.
I was open-minded about God's existence until I read David Bentley Hart's _The Experience of God: Being, Consciousness, Bliss_ (Yale University Press, 2013). After that, it has been intellectually impossible for me to be anything but a classical theist. Even if I sometimes have doubts about Christian doctrine, I cannot doubt classical theism. It makes too much sense.
Brilliant comment. God’s existence isn’t a problematic theme for most people. What Christianity says about God often is.
@@SknappCFAwhy is that?
@@dalspartan doctrinal differences or absence of a doctrine entirely. Some people can’t believe in Christian themes like the virgin birth, death and resurrection, real presence, etc., but have no problem believing in God. This category of believers, deists for example, is large and growing in the 21st century. Many of them are former Catholics.
@@SknappCFA so you’re arguing God is made in our image? Who would want a God that couldn’t do any of those things? Who would want a God that didn’t create the universe?
Complete uniform doctrine and agreement is evidence of a mindless cult, not a true faith. I don’t agree with Father Casey on everything, but I still love him. Even the Apostles had differences that were worked out or corrected, so why would we think we would be better?
Be open-minded on a solid ground !
4: 10
False conclusion:
If there is evidence of a fact about something, you do not have to "believe" or "disbelieve" those facts. Sure, you can not accept them but that would be intellectually dishonest.
- Furthermore, considering the love (or an immaterial feeling) of a family member or person as true is very different from considering it true that a supernatural being (god) exists.
Today we have forgotten the difference between facts and opinion. They are not equal. Being open minded and listening to others does not mean that we accept everything we hear - it just means that we listen with respect.
Shared on Facebook, so good!! God bless you Fr Casey & St Charles pray for us❤️🤗😇🙏➕️
Thank you very much for this heartfelt exposition, Father.
If the prerequisite to convince someone that you have “the answers” is that he believes in you, then you’re not going to convince anyone who isn’t already convinced.
That’s circular logic:
Believe me.
Why?
Because I have the answers.
How?
Believe me.
It doesn’t work that way. Christians apparent inability to think like a regular person is probably their biggest hurdle when it comes to evangelization.
Great Title - OPEN MIND - hahahaha - agree we should have a basic truths (out building blocks and what we stand for) but change (tweaks) can happen as we change (as the world changes) if we have an Open Mind ..."To everything there is a season, A time for every purpose under heaven: A time to be born, And a time to die; A time to plant, And a time..." Just don't be wishy washy 🌊 in all things all the time.
The end is also open to interpretation... That I loved my family, friends and neighbours is my goal.
@@russellmiles2861 Jews have it right and daily pray "The end" - Deuteronomy 6:4-7
Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord alone! Therefore, you shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength.
Great Vid. In the Army we frame this problem as "Paralysis through Analysis".
I always thought agnostic just means we can't fathom God with our ratio alone, while the gnostics thought they could understand with their superior minds. In that way a catholic would be an agnostic ... but not lukewarm.
Such wistom... Thank you
Your argumentation reminds me very much of Justin Martyr around the year 150, when he told about his experiences with different Greek philosophical schools.
I am a Unitarian and an agnostic. We Unitarians believe that we each must make our own search for meaning and truth. I said that once to a friend who asked me, "But then, what do you do when you have found it?" That's not the point. The search continues and will probably never end before death occurs. And I am OK with that. I am comfortable with the ambiguity. That's different from not being able to decide, or for being open to anything, including your extreme example of genocide.
This was the big thing that drove me away from more progressive views. Not gonna lie, embracing "open mindedness" in the extreme suggested honestly made me feel like I was going insane. That I was losing touch with reality. From there I sank into an era of personal darkness that I never, ever, EVER want to repeat. Thankfully, it was the Lord Himself who moved me onto my current path of healing. It's a bumpy road but I am getting better. In the future, I need to draw some real boundaries in conversation and in the ideas I entertain and to focus more on what is good, right, and beautiful.
How so? Open-mindedness simply means being open to ideas, opinions, thoughts, beliefs. It doesn't make any demands on you. It doesn't tell you what you should and shouldn't think or believe. Open-mindedness doesn't mean having no opinion and it doesn't mean having to accept or agree with everything either.
@seantaylor4095 you are correct about the general meaning, but I'm finding that words are driven more and more by the ideology/world view of the person you're talking to rather than by what the word actually means.
To you, my willingness to hear new ideas means that I'm sufficiently open-minded. To others, it is my eventual acceptance of the new idea which determines whether I'm actually open-minded or not. If I listen and still don't agree, I'm closed-minded, stubborn, or bigoted. Those negative labels attached to what they define as an unacceptable response then creates the subtle pressure to comply.
This applies to many other words: love, justice, equality.
If you ask ten different people what these words mean, you're not going to get precise, neutral dictionary answers. You're going to get their definition of the word fed by the world view that they have chosen.
I have found that in order to be considered "loving," I have to at least look like I'm complying with things I don't agree with. I have to either be willing to lie or keep silent. If I don't, it's implied that I have a deep-seated hatred that I should really address with the help of a therapist. Or that if I don't readily agree, that I'm contributing to people committing suicide.
You're right in that it's not exactly force, but it is a subtle form of manipulation.
To many love is only kind, never honest.
It is also worth noting in this kind of conversation that being open to any worldview is, in itself, a worldview.
@@chasingthesavior7490 I'm sorry you find yourself in this situation. I know it's easier said than done, but you have to stay true to what you personally believe (whatever side of the divide you are on) and you have to always be prepared to hear new information and form your own opinions off the back of it. If you make an honest judgement based on that, then that can never be considered close-minded regardless of the outcome.
Coercion is never acceptable and being pressured to think a certain way is psychological abuse. Have the confidence to trust your own instincts because anyone trying to take you down a particular path are only concerned with themselves, not you.
If you are never sure what a word means then look it up. I'm forever correcting people on what atheism actually means. If you ever want to know more about atheism or non-theistic views on science more generally then just let me know. All the best!
@seantaylor4095 thank you for your offer, but atheism honestly never made sense to me. All the best to you too.
_O D D • A R G U M E N T_
_don't you need an open mind to become Catholic in the first place?_
_if i'm jewish, don't i need an open mind to convert to Catholicism?_
_aren't you asking others to have an open mind/ strange logic_
Wow, this is one of your best videos.
Remember, the purpose of an open mind is to close it, on certain matters. Those who never do have abdicated their responsibility to think.
Our minds should always be open, but that doesn't mean we can't form opinions or beliefs on the basis of what information we have. An open mind with no opinion is an agnostic, an open mind with an opinion is an atheist, a closed mind is a theist.
Fr. Casey, I'm grateful. a really interesting and useful manual for practicing my Catholic religion and living my life.
Wow. I had never thought about this before. Thank you for making this video. I discovered your channel recently and you have a lot of interesting videos
"An open mind is like a fortress with its gates open and walls unguarded"
I understand and fully agree with your point, but it's funny to hear this when I've been an agnostic for most of my life and have only recently opened my mind to religion (and Christianity in particular).
The idea of having an open mind is rooted in science - however, most people misunderstand the concept.
Before you open your mind to new ideas and conclusions, you should find some of your own. Nature abhors a vacuum, and the metaphysical is no different. If there’s nothing for you to hold on to as a foundation of truth, then anyone or anything can manipulate you.
In science, you formulate a hypothesis. Experimental results can be inconclusive, supportive, or not supportive. The idea of being open minded is to say that if results are produced which contradict your hypothesis, or your methodology is proven to be flawed, then you re-evaluate without preconception.
Since it is impossible to experimentally prove or disprove God or any religion, applying the same standards of open-mindedness to those beliefs is a fallacious pursuit.
Asking someone to remain open-minded on their core moral principles is asking them to remain open to Satan at all times.
Open minded is a good thing when you know and you are aware of what one does not know, where a person realizes there’s more to learn!
But the padre’ talking about being open minded in a negative way is true.
There is a built-in presupposition in this perspective that ultimate truth can be found in this world. That may be the case, but it's not necessarily the case. We can make arguments for why there would be perfect truth in this world waiting to be discovered and why God wouldn't necessarily want it that way. And no matter what we argue, it will have subjective qualities. Nevertheless, I really enjoyed your take.