what it really means

I'm reflecting with some sadness how estranged I feel from one of the forums I am active on, following the big blow-up in August. Many women post there in the "off topic" area when they are having some trouble -- men, money, health, employment -- and get support and encouragement. I wonder if I would get the same response. I don't think I would, and I don't want to open myself up to the kind of "you deserve it, you bitch" comments I might get.

I also find myself not joining discussion threads in which certain other people are participating. They have already told me they don't want to hear anything I have to say.

This thinking brought me to the realization that whenever anyone says, "I prefer to think for myself," what they really mean is, "I'm following a specific set of rules here, only they are the cool rules (emphatically not your rules), the acceptable rules, and the rules tell me that I'm thinking for myself, and I'm fooling myself into thinking that I am, so quit challenging me about it, OK?"

Seriously. "I prefer to think for myself." There is just so much wrong with this statement, where to begin?

On the face it, it's obnoxious because it implies that the listener, the person to whom the statement is directed, doesn't think for himself. As if it's not possible for a thoughtful person to weigh evidence and come to a conclusion different from the speaker's. The arrogance and condescension are unmistakable.

Of course, every functioning adult "thinks for himself", how could anyone survive otherwise? Do we need overseers telling us how to order our days, when to pay our bills, when to hug our kids? Of course not, although many is the day when I'd appreciate someone just telling me what to cook for dinner, but that's not the same thing.

It's obvious that the speaker isn't talking about these day-to-day trivialities. No, anyone who says "I prefer to think for myself" is most likely referring to a larger philosophical or moral issue, and that's where I think it gets very dangerous indeed to "think for yourself."

I'm 41 years old and still grappling with many thorny issues, but I'm lucky because so many men and women, much more intelligent, articulate, and holy than I am have gone before me to show me the way. We've got writings in their own words, and we have accounts of their lives to guide us. When I hit upon a difficult issue, I consider myself very fortunate that I am not left "thinking for myself." I have learned so much from reading and listening to other's experiences and insights, and I continue to do so every day. Of course, I take it all in and integrate it, but I can't say I thought for myself all of these ideas, because I didn't. I learned them by listening and reading.

A big part of the cache of "I prefer to think for myself" is that it rejects authority, which, when you're a rebellious teenager, is the height of cool. As a parent, I understand the role that such rebellions take in the separation of child from parent, and in the formation of the child's identity within himself, as opposed to his identity within the family. For teenagers (and toddlers), rebellion is a necessary part of growing up.

But wholesale rejection of an entire culture's moral tradition isn't cool, it's sophomoric. The thinking-for-themselvers are saying that they know better than everyone that's gone before them. They've carefully weighed all the moral and spiritual implications of the position they are advocating, and they've deconstructed the arguments against them. Or so they would have us believe. If that were true, such folks would deservedly get my respect. But I have yet to have a discussion on the substance of a matter with any of these folks. They can't do it, because, you see, they're thinking for themselves. Tossing out that line is a the grown up equivalent of the kid-practice of covering your ears with your hands while chanting, "la la la, I can't hear you!"

"I prefer to think for myself" really means "I'm smarter than you, and I know more than anyone else ever could about this subject." It really means "I am too caught up in my own superiority to even listen to opposing arguments." It really means, "I am incapable of discussing anything or defending my position, because I'm really just repeating the mantra of my crowd, and I'm not going to allow you to challenge that. I may just be bleating along with the herd, but at least I'm thinking for myself."

Go ahead, discard the knowledge that humanity has painstakingly accumulated for millenia. Discount the experiences of countless generations; they are irrelevant when you want to do a little social engineering. Do whatever you want! Who could tell otherwise, when your own thoughts represent the pinnacle of human moral development?

Sometimes I come off as arrogant, and sometimes I am a know-it-all. I can be condescending and inconsiderate. But it takes my breath away when I understand what "I prefer to think for myself" really means. I suppose I should admire such people for their courage, for their willingness to set themselves up as unassailable, for their belief in their own infallibility. But since their courage is born of arrogance, I'll have to pass. Smart ass that I am, even I don't -- can't -- pretend to have all the answers.

Cliches are cliches because they are true, you know? In just the same way, fundamental truths underly our moral traditions. These "old" ways work. How do we know they work? Because they have been working for thousands of years. I'm not saying this is Utopia, because we all know there is room for improvement. But over the course of our history, I think you can honestly say that there has been improvement in our human condition, and I think it's in large part because of our moral tradition.

Perhaps the greatest blessing we share as humans is that we are not limited to our own individual life's experiences. We have the ability to examine other's lives and learn from their failures as well as their successes. You're lucky if you can learn from your own mistakes, but you're doubly blessed if you can learn from someone else's mistakes and save yourself the trouble of making your own. It seems obvious to me that this applies not just to the practical world but also to the philosophical and moral realms as well. Maybe these folks don't see it that way, though, and that's why they "prefer to think for themselves."

I say, why limit yourself to what one consciousness can conceive, one mind can discern? What a sorry thing it is to reject the wealth of human experience available to us.