Posted by Friend [Friend] on November 24, 1999 at 08:36:20 {BlpRHB6gpcrRIg7iiOekOgnjR4Br/g}:
In Reply to: *****For Friend posted by AF on November 24, 1999 at 07:15:37:
AF
But if a JW comes to a conclusion that differs from the Society’s, he is instructed to accept the Society’s conclusion instead, and to conclude that his own reasoning is too poor to go on.
That statement I believe epitomizes your position, and it is wrong. The Society knows full well that some JWs will conclude differently on various subjects, including doctrinal subjects. In such cases the Society encourages expressing those conclusions within an established framework for an answer, clarification or change. Such encouragement is an admission that not all JWs will conclude just as the Society. Consequentially, while JWs are encouraged to consider the views of the Society in their conclusions (by not thinking independent of those views) they are encouraged to think as individuals. Otherwise they could not come up with divergent ideas, requests for clarification or change.
The rest of what you said is skewed by your fundamental error above.
The problem lay in the framework. While I feel that framework is too constraining it is not as constraining or duplicitous as you portray it.
Friend