Secular Humanism?....

[alphamale]

Hey:

I read about this non-religious philosophy called Secular Humanism (SH) earlier today. Its sounds exactly like what I believe in. I had heard of the Humanist movement before but never knew anything about it. I think i'm going to convert officially from Agnostic to SH as of Jan 1, 2007. Below is a brief overview of SH which has had many famous followers:

 

Secular Humanism is a way of thinking and living that aims to bring out the best in people so that all people can have the best in life. Secular humanists reject supernatural and authoritarian beliefs. They affirm that we must take responsibility for our own lives and the communities and world in which we live. Secular humanism emphasizes reason and scientific inquiry, individual freedom and responsibility, human values and compassion, and the need for tolerance and cooperation.

 

What do you guys think?

[blind_otter]

It seems better than just being a general athiest or agnostic because there is still a morality system involved.

 

But I'm Catholic, so what do I know?

[JamesM]

Secular humanism can be defined as the belief that:

 

Man is God.

[Moose]

Secular humanism can be defined as the belief that:

 

Man is God.

Agreed.....

 

This is the part that gets me.....:"the need for tolerance and cooperation"How can a belief system stay consistant with this clause?

[a4a]

Secular humanism can be defined as the belief that:

 

Man is God.

 

 

I have to disagree. I think the short definition would be that : Man should at all times attempt to do the right thing and above all attempt to never cause harm.

 

Ahimsa type thinking of sorts.

 

Along with taking responsibilty for your own life without the need to rely on others/an entity to blame or praise for your deeds or experiences in life.

[Storyrider]

I would ask you the following:

 

1. What is intrinsically positive about humanity and why?

 

2. Does faith in humanity make sense if we appeared here basically by an accident of nature? If so, how are we any better than other animals?

 

3. Different groups of humans have different values. How do we choose which values to put our faith in?

 

4. Looking at history, do the good things about humanity outweigh the bad so that it makes common sense to put our faith there?

 

I do think exploring this option can't hurt.

[Moose]

Man should at all times attempt to do the right thing and above all attempt to never cause harm.

How is that any different than Christianity?

Along with taking responsibilty for your own life without the need to rely on others/an entity to blame or praise for your deeds or experiences in life.

A true Christian does take responsibilty for his/her own life and actions.

 

If something isn't right, we don't blame God for it......?? I don't know where you get that from?

[a4a]

Alpha there is a book called the Cultural Creatives that really takes a look at SH and various belief systems, you may enjoy it. A bit dry but very interesting study of this subject.

[JamesM]

I have to disagree. I think the short definition would be that : Man should at all times attempt to do the right thing and above all attempt to never cause harm.

 

Along with taking responsibilty for your own life without the need to rely on others/an entity to blame or praise for your deeds or experiences in life.

 

 

And yes, we disagree. Here is a sentence from alphamale's post:

 

Secular humanists reject supernatural and authoritarian beliefs. They affirm that we must take responsibility for our own lives and the communities and world in which we live.

 

That is simplified even simpler by saying that "There is no god but Man."

[dropdeadlegs]

Agreed.....

 

This is the part that gets me.....:"the need for tolerance and cooperation"How can a belief system stay consistant with this clause?

 

Since all I know about this belief system is what has been posted on this thread I don't necessarily have the Secular Humanist's answer, but I think tolerance and cooperation applies to being equal within the belief system regardless to age, race, sex, etc. as well as tolerating those who do not share your belief system ie: accepting that some will disagree and just leave them be.

 

That doesn't sound so far-fetched to me. Why couldn't there be consistency with that dogma? Most belief systems seem to have this in one sense or another.

 

Well, Alpha, I think it is great that you are exploring your spiritual/belief systems. I don't know enough about this one to comment intelligently and as you know from another thread I can't get past not believing in the Holy Trinity thus far in my limited search for my own belief system. But I definitely like the tenets of others beliefs in many ways, probably because they sound easier than my own.

[Storyrider]

...at all times attempt to do the right thing

 

This is the problematic phrase if you don't have an authority for your belief system. Who decides what is right when there is disagreement? Or is it relative?

 

For example, if I don't believe people should hold property, I can kick you out of your house and move into it myself. I don't call it stealing. You do call it stealing. Who is right?

[blind_otter]

That is simplified even simpler by saying that "There is no god but Man."

 

I disagree, JamesM, I find your statement to be too reductionist.

 

The Buddhists believe, a central tenant of the belief system in fact, that salvation lies through our actions and choices and our actions are the ground on which we stand.

 

Since SH rejects supernatural beliefs, the statement "The is no God but man" is not applicable. SH's don't believe that man is God, because they don't believe in a "god" concept.

[a4a]

How is that any different than Christianity?A true Christian does take responsibilty for his/her own life and actions.

 

If something isn't right, we don't blame God for it......?? I don't know where you get that from?

 

Because there is no entity to believe that could be responsible for what happens in life... The entity did not take a life, create the life, or define the life of a person.

 

I am sure many entity believers (not just christians) do take responsibility for their actions. Not all but many.

 

Not all may blame or praise god for the happenings in their life but many do.

Example would be : God wanted to call him/her home. God blessed me with a child.

 

In my view it would be more like tragic circumstances took his life either by disease, accident, timing,........... not an entity.

 

The entity would not bless me with a child..... science such as IVF may, or proper timing of intercourse, nor would the entity make an accidental pregnancy occur.

 

I won the lottery because I bought a ticket and it happened to be the winning ticket........ not an act of the entity I may worship.

 

Many do praise and blame the entity for the happenings in their life. Give that responsibility to the entity.

 

(not saying all do, but many do)

[westernxer]

I consider myself a humanist, but not a secular one.

 

Mainly, I believe in treating others how I'd like to be treated.

 

This doesn't apply to dating, most of the time.

[a4a]

This is the problematic phrase if you don't have an authority for your belief system. Who decides what is right when there is disagreement? Or is it relative?

 

For example, if I don't believe people should hold property, I can kick you out of your house and move into it myself. I don't call it stealing. You do call it stealing. Who is right?

 

Well a simple example of that is I do not believe in many things other do. If I do not believe that people should hold property...... I will not hold property.

 

If I do not believe in eating cows........ I simply will not eat cows.

 

I may want to voice my opinion publically but the best thing I can do to show my belief is to practice it myself. If I do not want others to tread on my belief to not hold property or eat cows I will not tread on their belief to buy land and eat cows. Tolerance is key.

[quankanne]

I think it intentionally seals itself off from the opportunity man has to discover that his life is more than just the physical plane he lives in.

 

it's easy to deify oneself by saying "I'm a good person, I've adopted all these rules and fulfilled them, therefore I've done what I'm supposed to do" and ignore his spirituality. And, I feel that secular humanism makes man just another drone working endlessly to fulfill a checklist that he's made his life out to be, rather than looking at his uniqueness because he's a spiritual creature.

 

people don't like contemplating their spiritual side because they're content to live in the here and now, and they don't want to be told that what they're doing might be wrong. Again leading to the self-deification thing.

 

but, if it floats your boat, that's your choice.

[Moose]

Tolerance is key.

Question then?

 

This islamic "Jihad",......we are the so called "infidels" and are to be destroyed......

 

How does one tolerate Christians being killed because of this belief?

 

You can't put a gauge on tolerance. It either is or isn't......

[Storyrider]

Well a simple example of that is I do not believe in many things other do. If I do not believe that people should hold property...... I will not hold property.

 

If I do not believe in eating cows........ I simply will not eat cows.

 

I may want to voice my opinion publically but the best thing I can do to show my belief is to practice it myself. If I do not want others to tread on my belief to not hold property or eat cows I will not tread on their belief to buy land and eat cows. Tolerance is key.

 

This sounds great, but it is somewhat utopian. If I am stronger than you, I can force you to eat cows and I may not care how nice you are to me. If I get fifty dollars for every cow I force you to eat, then it is in my interest to force you to eat cows, and if I can, I will.

 

Unless we both agree to follow the values as set forth by a higher authority. I suppose this could be a government rather than a diety or a sacred text. But a sacred text holds even a government to a higher authority.

[Love Hurts]

Freedom is Fabulous…

 

If that is where you are, go for it.

I appreciate the freedoms that we have and our right to choose.

Follow your heart…if after a time SH doesn’t seem to fit try something else.

 

Entourages.... of beliefs are at our fingertips.

We have Freedom to pick and choose…

Just follow your heart. I hope you find your nitch.

 

Good Luck

[alphamale]

It seems better than just being a general athiest or agnostic because there is still a morality system involved.

its does sound cool doesn't it? like when people ask me what I believe in I can say "I'm a proud Secular Humanist"

 

Secular humanism can be defined as the belief that:

 

Man is God.

excellent, excellent...

 

Alpha there is a book called the Cultural Creatives that really takes a look at SH and various belief systems, you may enjoy it. A bit dry but very interesting study of this subject.

thanx A4A...i'll look into it...

 

Well, Alpha, I think it is great that you are exploring your spiritual/belief systems.

well i sorta just stumbled upon it on wikipedia and i sat there reading the article with great interst. It says pretty much what I have believed or a long time but I didn't know it was a official philosophy. So I thinks its totally cool and totally me

 

You can't put a gauge on tolerance. It either is or isn't......

i would agree MOOSE, you either tolerate everyone or tolerate no one, there is no middle ground

[a4a]

I think it intentionally seals itself off from the opportunity man has to discover that his life is more than just the physical plane he lives in.

 

it's easy to deify oneself by saying "I'm a good person, I've adopted all these rules and fulfilled them, therefore I've done what I'm supposed to do" and ignore his spirituality. And, I feel that secular humanism makes man just another drone working endlessly to fulfill a checklist that he's made his life out to be, rather than looking at his uniqueness because he's a spiritual creature.

 

people don't like contemplating their spiritual side because they're content to live in the here and now, and they don't want to be told that what they're doing might be wrong. Again leading to the self-deification thing.

 

but, if it floats your boat, that's your choice.

 

ahh but see you can feel spiritual without involving an entity. You can have a connection with another human, nature, or endeavor and feel a spiritual connection with all and no entity is involved. Those that do not believe in an entity do not feel less love, joy, happiness in their life. The entity is not a factor as they do not believe that it exists.

 

The opposite could be said as well..... you become a simple drone to an entity which may or may not exist. You do the bidding daily of your own chosen entity simply because you choose to or feel fearful to do so. IMHO it is much like replacing a parent with an entity in its place.

 

The here and now is amazing. The here and now is full of good, bad, wonder, awe, and misery. It is very spiritual - beautiful and disgusting. Life can be just as amazing and terrible without an entity to rely on/believe in. You can be just as content and at peace without an entity.

 

Neither is wrong......

[My Fair Katie]

Though he himself was religious, secular humanism sounds a lot like Kant's Categorical Imperative.

 

Anywho, the belief that you need an authoritarian higher power in order to be a good person is absurd. I'm an atheist and I consider myself to be a good and moral person. I don't need the threat eternal d__nation or salvation to do the right thing.

[Storyrider]

its does sound cool doesn't it? like when people ask me what I believe in I can say "I'm a proud Secular Humanist"

 

 

My dad says, "I'm a militant humanist!!!!" and he says it with a lot of fierce gusto. It takes people aback.

[a4a]

Question then?

 

This islamic "Jihad",......we are the so called "infidels" and are to be destroyed......

 

How does one tolerate Christians being killed because of this belief?

 

You can't put a gauge on tolerance. It either is or isn't......

 

Perhaps it is the belief in the entity itself which causes so much harm?

 

I can see the Jihad as being human first, christians as being human first.

All seem to be doing the bidding of their entity to some degree or another if you look at this.

 

This kind of reminds me of the Star Trek Prime Directive

Religions remind me of the Borg. More so the fanatics I suppose.

[alphamale]

Some notable believers in SH are:

• Arthur C. Clarke
  
• John Lennon
  
• Frank Zappa
  
• Carl Sagan
  
• Kurt Vonnegut
  
• Gene Roddenberry
  
• Isaac Asimov
  
• Steve Allen (the entertainer)