Advertisement
 
Post Reply
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
A Humanist Question
13 months ago  ::  Jun 03, 2011 - 7:25PM #1
Wolfhoundgrowl
Posts: 82
Why does it appear that (from numbers involed) that so many atheists & agnostics (most of whom are humanistic) are reluctant to commit to Humanism?

 
Quick Reply
Cancel
13 months ago  ::  Jun 03, 2011 - 11:29PM #2
JCarlin
Posts: 3,078

Jun 3, 2011 -- 7:25PM, Wolfhoundgrowl wrote:

Why does it appear that (from numbers involed) that so many atheists & agnostics (most of whom are humanistic) are reluctant to commit to Humanism?

 



There are many atheists and agnostics as well as some nominally religious people that are humanists note lc "h" but are not believers.  That is, they reject any group that has a creed, dogma, manifesto, or other belief statement that either is required or implied to apply to all.  I will get my humanism direct from the source: other humans that are important to me.  I don't need or want some authority figure or group to tell me what Humanism is or is not.  

J'Carlin
If the shoe doesn't fit, don't cram your foot in it and complain.
Quick Reply
Cancel
13 months ago  ::  Jun 04, 2011 - 12:37AM #3
Wiscidea
Posts: 2,313

Jun 3, 2011 -- 7:25PM, Wolfhoundgrowl wrote:

Why does it appear that (from numbers involed) that so many atheists & agnostics (most of whom are humanistic) are reluctant to commit to Humanism?



(1) I'm not interested in replacing one religion with another. JCarlin expressed it almost perfectly.


(2) I'm more interested in isms that include other species. This does NOT mean that I despise human beings or would toss them under a bus to save, say, polar bears. But once our basic needs are met, I believe we should focus our efforts on caring for the entire biosphere. And if we wish to raise our standard of living, we should find ways to do it that are compatible with the rest of the natural world. I don't believe ensuring more people have 3000-sq-ft houses and big-screen TVs should be more important than preserving biological diversity. There was a time when Humanism would have embraced building a huge dam that provided energy to industries producing consumer goods while flooding vast portions of a threatened ecosystem. Is this still true?


 

"Some people claim that there's a woman to blame. But I know it's my own damn fault."

Jimmy Buffet (Margaritaville)
Quick Reply
Cancel
13 months ago  ::  Jun 04, 2011 - 12:39AM #4
Wiscidea
Posts: 2,313

(3) I might not even agree with all Humanist principles. I think capital-letter isms are for people who agree with close to 100% of the principles.

"Some people claim that there's a woman to blame. But I know it's my own damn fault."

Jimmy Buffet (Margaritaville)
Quick Reply
Cancel
13 months ago  ::  Jun 06, 2011 - 4:02PM #5
Wolfhoundgrowl
Posts: 82

Thanks for your responses.


Wiscidea, The idea that Humanism is only concerned with humans (as hinted above) is a misappropriation of the term.


The term Humanism refers more storngly to a way of life boUrne out of human reasoning (which is apparently the best decision making tool we have) and committed to learning from the human expeirence (which is how we interact with reality) The 'Human' part of Humanism refers to our starting point rather than our finishing point and therefore does not exlude the bisopshere nor the rest of the animals.


I'd be interested to know which principles of Humanism you don't subscribe to?


 


JCarlin,


For the most part that is how may Humanism (mine a capital 'H') works, I agree with you except that you think there is an auhtority figure in Humanism, and there isn't, it works ion the same principle as humanism except that Humansim nails it's colurs to tha mast rather than folding them away in the pocket.


I'm not a member of a local group (not at the moment anyway), but I am a member of the 'International Humanist & Ethical Union' because if there is a goal in Humanism (or humanism), and I maintain that there is, it's got to me more efectively accomplished in numbers.


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
13 months ago  ::  Jun 06, 2011 - 7:19PM #6
mountain_man
Posts: 27,986

Jun 3, 2011 -- 7:25PM, Wolfhoundgrowl wrote:

Why does it appear that (from numbers involved) that so many atheists & agnostics (most of whom are humanistic) are reluctant to commit to Humanism?


I know of no such reluctance. I'm the president of the local Humanist group. Maybe it's in the definition of "commit." Humanism is not something you commit to, nor is it something you can study to become. It's just who you are. I did not become a Humanist because I thought it was a reasonable philosophy. Humanism agreed with my philosophy of life and morality.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.
Quick Reply
Cancel
13 months ago  ::  Jun 06, 2011 - 7:23PM #7
mountain_man
Posts: 27,986

Jun 4, 2011 -- 12:37AM, Wiscidea wrote:

(1) I'm not interested in replacing one religion with another. JCarlin expressed it almost perfectly.


Secular Humanism is no more a religion than Atheism is.


(2) I'm more interested in isms that include other species. This does NOT mean that I despise human beings or would toss them under a bus to save, say, polar bears. But once our basic needs are met, I believe we should focus our efforts on caring for the entire biosphere. And if we wish to raise our standard of living, we should find ways to do it that are compatible with the rest of the natural world. I don't believe ensuring more people have 3000-sq-ft houses and big-screen TVs should be more important than preserving biological diversity. There was a time when Humanism would have embraced building a huge dam that provided energy to industries producing consumer goods while flooding vast portions of a threatened ecosystem. Is this still true?


Never was true. Secular Humanism has always included a responsibility to take care of our biosphere for the benefit of ALL species.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.
Quick Reply
Cancel
13 months ago  ::  Jun 06, 2011 - 11:53PM #8
mountain_man
Posts: 27,986

The Affirmations of Humanism: A Statement of Principles


We are committed to the application of reason and science to the understanding of the universe and to the solving of human problems.


We deplore efforts to denigrate human intelligence, to seek to explain the world in     supernatural terms, and to look outside nature for salvation.


We believe that scientific discovery and technology can contribute to the betterment of     human life.


We believe in an open and pluralistic society and that democracy is the best guarantee of protecting human rights from authoritarian elites and repressive majorities.


We are committed to the principle of the separation of church and state.


We cultivate the arts of negotiation and compromise as a means of resolving differences and achieving mutual understanding.


We are concerned with securing justice and fairness in society and with eliminating     discrimination and intolerance.


We believe in supporting the disadvantaged and the handicapped so that they will be able to help themselves.


We attempt to transcend divisive parochial loyalties based on race, religion, gender,     nationality, creed, class, sexual orientation, or ethnicity, and strive to work together     for the common good of humanity.


We want to protect and enhance the earth, to preserve it for future generations, and to avoid inflicting needless suffering on other species.


We believe in enjoying life here and now and in developing our creative talents to their fullest.


We believe in the cultivation of moral excellence.


We respect the right to privacy. Mature adults should be allowed to fulfill their     aspirations, to express their sexual preferences, to exercise reproductive freedom, to have access to comprehensive and informed health-care, and to die with dignity.


We believe in the common moral decencies: altruism, integrity, honesty, truthfulness, responsibility. Humanist ethics is amenable to critical, rational guidance. There are     normative standards that we discover together. Moral principles are tested by their     consequences.


We are deeply concerned with the moral education of our children.


We want to nourish reason and compassion.


We are engaged by the arts no less than by the sciences.


We are citizens of the universe and are excited by discoveries still to be made in the     cosmos.


We are skeptical of untested claims to knowledge, and we are open to novel ideas and     seek new departures in our thinking.


We affirm humanism as a realistic alternative to theologies of despair and ideologies of  violence and as a source of rich personal significance and genuine satisfaction in the     service to others.


We believe in optimism rather than pessimism, hope rather than despair, learning in the place of dogma, truth instead of ignorance, joy rather than guilt or sin, tolerance in the place of fear, love instead of hatred, compassion over selfishness, beauty instead of ugliness, and reason rather than blind faith or irrationality.


We believe in the fullest realization of the best and noblest that we are capable of as     human beings.


Source.


That's just one list. There are others, but they're all similar. Which ones are something that shouldn't be a basic principle for anyone?

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.
Quick Reply
Cancel
13 months ago  ::  Jun 07, 2011 - 3:56AM #9
Eudaimonist
Posts: 1,999

I won't commit to humanism because I'm not a humanist.  I have my own ethical philosophy, which is perhaps similar in some ways to humanism, but isn't precisely humanism.


I'll review the parts of Humanist Manifesto III that set my teeth on edge.  You may assume rough agreement with the rest of that document.


Humanism is a progressive philosophy of life that, without supernaturalism, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good of humanity.



I think it is very dangerous to speak of a "greater good" above that of individuals.  Sacrificing for a "greater good" is the creed of tyrants.


And people should feel perfectly free to aspire to their own personal good without feeling that they have to be humanitarians.  There's nothing wrong with being a humanitarian, but I don't think that an ethics should demand this of one.


We are committed to treating each person as having inherent worth and dignity, and to making informed choices in a context of freedom consonant with responsibility.



A key unexplained word here is "responsibility".  I think it is a codeword for taxation.


Life's fulfillment emerges from individual participation in the service of humane ideals.



Not necessarily.


Working to benefit society maximizes individual happiness.



Nonsense.  If everyone were to work to benefit themselves (though not at the expense of others), that would maximize individual happiness.  Working to benefit society might possibly help in some small ways, but is not the key to widespread happiness.


We seek to minimize the inequities of circumstance and ability, and we support a just distribution of nature's resources and the fruits of human effort so that as many as possible can enjoy a good life.



And here it is -- the leftist politics.  I would like to see a just society, but that means that people get to decide what to do with what they earn.  Sure, I want to see widespread education and plenty of opportunities for career, entrepreneurship, and making one's own way in society with dignity, but all humanists can see is "distributing" things.


This subtle collectivism is a deal breaker for me.


 


eudaimonia,


Mark

Quick Reply
Cancel
13 months ago  ::  Jun 07, 2011 - 5:17PM #10
Wolfhoundgrowl
Posts: 82

Ok, whilst I personally accept all of the principles of the Humanist manifesto, there is nothing which requires that the Humanist manifesto defines Humansim for all persons, in all places @ all times.


There are Humanist groups which are not memewbrs of the IHEU becuase they don't square with the whole of the Humanist Mannifesto.


Whislt I perosnally subscribe to the Humansit Mannifesto II, I feel that a reading of the history of the development of Humanism/humanism serves better to offer a definition and description of Humanism that list of statements.

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
Post Reply
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook