Post Reply
Page 1 of 3  •  1 2 3 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Do I fit in the Secular Humanist bin?
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 1:31PM #1
Ken
Posts: 33,859

Mar 5, 2012 -- 1:12PM, Lady_Heresy wrote:


I am non-theist. Basically I just do not care if there are any gods or not. I think they are more likely more highly evolved aliens that got involved in human gene manipulation and either left us as a failed experiment or left us to "cook" awhile before possibly returning to exploit the results. 



If you think it's likely that "gods" are nothing more than highly evolved aliens, you're an atheist. After all, highly evolved aliens aren't gods. I don't know whether you're a secular humanist or not because I'm not sure what secular humanism is.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 2:53PM #2
Bob_the_Lunatic
Posts: 3,458

Mar 5, 2012 -- 1:31PM, Ken wrote:


Mar 5, 2012 -- 1:12PM, Lady_Heresy wrote:


I am non-theist. Basically I just do not care if there are any gods or not. I think they are more likely more highly evolved aliens that got involved in human gene manipulation and either left us as a failed experiment or left us to "cook" awhile before possibly returning to exploit the results. 



If you think it's likely that "gods" are nothing more than highly evolved aliens, you're an atheist. After all, highly evolved aliens aren't gods. I don't know whether you're a secular humanist or not because I'm not sure what secular humanism is.




I don't know... the "gods are highly evolved aliens" bit makes her sound more Mormon than Secular Humanist to me....

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 2:55PM #3
Sparky_Spotty
Posts: 833

I can't stand when people use the word "magick".


Its the pretentious spelling that irritates me.



I think GENERALLY, secular humanists do not believe in supernatural things, but that's only my generalized opinion.



Other than that, I have nothing constructive to add to this discussion.  :p

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 3:00PM #4
Ken
Posts: 33,859

Mar 5, 2012 -- 2:55PM, Sparky_Spotty wrote:


I can't stand when people use the word "magick".


Its the pretentious spelling that irritates me.



Me too. It's an obsolete spelling from the days when people wrote "publick" and "tragick."

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 3:32PM #5
F1fan
Posts: 11,957

Mar 5, 2012 -- 2:53PM, Bob_the_Lunatic wrote:


Mar 5, 2012 -- 1:31PM, Ken wrote:


Mar 5, 2012 -- 1:12PM, Lady_Heresy wrote:


I am non-theist. Basically I just do not care if there are any gods or not. I think they are more likely more highly evolved aliens that got involved in human gene manipulation and either left us as a failed experiment or left us to "cook" awhile before possibly returning to exploit the results. 



If you think it's likely that "gods" are nothing more than highly evolved aliens, you're an atheist. After all, highly evolved aliens aren't gods. I don't know whether you're a secular humanist or not because I'm not sure what secular humanism is.




I don't know... the "gods are highly evolved aliens" bit makes her sound more Mormon than Secular Humanist to me....




Or even the Urantia folks with all that alien talk, although they believe in Jesus and a single god, so are true theists.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 3:40PM #6
F1fan
Posts: 11,957

Mar 5, 2012 -- 2:55PM, Sparky_Spotty wrote:


I can't stand when people use the word "magick".


Its the pretentious spelling that irritates me.



Can we say these folks are sic.


I think GENERALLY, secular humanists do not believe in supernatural things, but that's only my generalized opinion.





I thought secular only refers to there being no religious influence politically in a given society.  And humanism being a philosphy that aims to protecting basic human experience, in that people are fed, shelter provided, well-being promoted, etc.  I've heard some theists refer to secular humanism as being "godless", but that implies it is evil.   It is odd that humanism has probably more respect for humanity than some religious views, such as those of fundamentalists who deny climate change and the need for polution controls.  I don't see how secular humanism necessarily rejects theists from the category, although they will have to be liberal.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 3:50PM #7
Sparky_Spotty
Posts: 833

Mar 5, 2012 -- 3:40PM, F1fan wrote:


Can we say these folks are sic.




taBoom Tish!


Hello?  Hello?  Is this thing on?


Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 5:26PM #8
Ken
Posts: 33,859

Mar 5, 2012 -- 5:21PM, Lady_Heresy wrote:

in the pagan/neopagan/witchcraft community the spelling "magick" with a "k" is used to distinguish between parlor tricks or birthday party entertainment and the manipulation of the elements of nature to bend to the will of the above persuasion practioner with or without a religious context.


It's quite unnecessary. Everyone understands the distinction from the context. If a distinction really has to be made, referring to the former as "stage magic" is always sufficient. "Magic" by itself denotes the latter.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 5:38PM #9
costrel
Posts: 6,226

Mar 5, 2012 -- 5:21PM, Lady_Heresy wrote:

in the pagan/neopagan/witchcraft community the spelling "magick" with a "k" is used to distinguish between parlor tricks or birthday party entertainment and the manipulation of the elements of nature to bend to the will of the above persuasion practioner with or without a religious context. So it is relevant to the conversation as I used it and in it's proper form. It is only perceived as pretentious to people who are generally intolerant of all belief systems and especially those that come under the neo-pagan umbrella.


I also agree that it is relevant to the conversation, and I understand that magic and magick are not the same thing. As Ronald Hutton explains in The Triumph of the Moon: A History of Modern Pagan Witchcraft (Oxford University Press, 1999), Aleister Crowley explained that magick is "the exact opposite of religion; it is, even more than Physical Science, its irreconcilable enemy .... Magick investigates the laws of Nature with the idea of making use of them" (p. 175). Hutton also notes that Crowley identified magick as "a branch of physics" (p. 174). 

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 6:51PM #10
Sparky_Spotty
Posts: 833

Mar 5, 2012 -- 5:21PM, Lady_Heresy wrote:

..... It is only perceived as pretentious to people who are generally intolerant of all belief systems and especially those that come under the neo-pagan umbrella.




hmmm, not really.  I think neo-paganism is kinda cool and romantic sounding. I have no issue with people practicing it for their own personal enjoyment or spiritual fulfillment.


Ultimately, as much as I would like to, I cannot force myself to believe in something for which I find no credible evidence.


I suppose I'd prefer that the pagans just spelt it like magic. Those who believe and accept that it is real will have no problem mentally separating and distinguishing it from the tricks of an illusionist.


Mar 5, 2012 -- 5:21PM, Lady_Heresy wrote:

.....


Beliefnet has some interesting articles on Secular Humanism and what it is and what it is not. I just did not know if they are anti-paranormal or anti-spiritual. I know Atheists are. But usually Humanists are lumped in with Atheists. Sorry if I am in the wrong place.


 




I would never personally presume to tell anyone whether they are in the right place here or not. All are welcome as far as I am concerned.


I personally don't believe in the paranormal, some atheists might, not sure if that is a problem.

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 3  •  1 2 3 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook