Agnostic.com

8 0

Humanism is practically a religion-esque ideology. Prove me wrong!

AnuVlad 3 May 8
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

8 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

A Humanist trusts to the scientific method when it comes to understanding how the universe works and rejects the idea of the supernatural (and is therefore an atheist or agnostic)
makes their ethical decisions based on reason, empathy, and a concern for human beings and other sentient animals believes that, in the absence of an afterlife and any discernible purpose to the universe, human beings can act to give their own lives meaning by seeking happiness in this life and helping others to do the same. Now if that's a religion - then I'm religious.

A religion in the traditional sense? No. Is it an ideology? Yes.

@AnuVlad I can't argue with that analysis

0

I am honestly trying to have a discussion here, not an argument, and I thank you guys for not going 4chan on me! lol

Hi Anu,

On Agnostic, we really try to go for charity first, second, & third (maybe attack mode after that? Haha!). So, I'm glad that you feel that way. 🙂 I'd just avoid the "prove me wrong!" in future—unless we're talking math.

@Rhetoric I meant that in jest, but my humor dies in text form it seems

2

I've no idea what you mean let alone whether I'm supposed to care. Clearly humanism shares many things with religion. Just as a religion, humanism can be described as a system of belief, a creed or a philosophy. Some may be drawn to it through social or tribal factors. As with any philosophy outside of total solipsism there are precedents taken on faith.

For example I have certain beliefs about the nature of our existence.
I believe that the universe is governed by fixed rules that may be discovered and deduced through observation and experimentation.
I believe in the value of human life.
These beliefs are compliant with the humanist manifesto:

  • Knowledge of the world is derived by observation, experimentation, and rational analysis. (See empiricism.)
  • Humans are an integral part of nature, the result of evolutionary change, an unguided process.
  • Ethical values are derived from human need and interest as tested by experience. (See ethical naturalism.)
  • Life’s fulfillment emerges from individual participation in the service of humane ideals.
  • Humans are social by nature and find meaning in relationships.
  • Working to benefit society maximizes individual happiness.

I'm aware that these tenets are merely a collection of subjective observations and that not all people will necessarily concur. I reiterate that this is something humanism has in common with religion.

However it is not in these similarities that I find fault with religion. My problems with religion start with demands for special treatment in society and when a tradition of irrational belief is expected trump the best determination of a confluence of evidence. That's certainly not the case for all religion and where it's not impacting on others then I have no problem coexisting with tolerant religion.

Actually, that is near exactly what I am trying to say and why I didn't say that Secular Humanism IS a religion, thats why I said "religion-esque."

0

Why would I. if you think youre right ?. Why do you want to be proven wrong?
if you have a point of view you can state it. if you want to argue over 'terms' I am not interested.
there is a place here for people to argue over word usage!

For one, I do not mean to imply I am correct, I could be wrong at all times about anything and everything. Even my own existence is technically up for debate.

Debating over wording is not my intent and people suggesting here that I am trying to paint secular humanism as an actual religion (in concordance with the dictionary) is far from my point, though I do not fault them for thinking that at all.

My point is Secular Humanism, in practice, tends to act like how most religions do, even it's foundation is similar.

Also, I may think I am correct and run off that assumption, but what's the point of purposely taking a stance whilst assuming you are not at all correct? And again, I may run off that assumption, but I always allow for being wrong because life is too damn short for senselessly holding onto incorrect viewpoints, that's why I want to challenge myself by having this discussion..

1

I often here this about atheism that it a religion.
A religion contain one or more of these god(s), faith, dogmatic scriptures,supernatual.
Atheism nor does humanism contain any of the above.
Instead of ask us to disapprove it you need to prove that it is a religion. You have the burden of proof

I in no way mean to say that Atheism is a religion.

I only mean that Secular Humanism walks that line by mimicking the same methods as other religions.

@AnuVlad I was saying people also do that to atheism..
Can you explain how secular humanism is anything like a religion...

3

Try using a dictionary
religion
noun
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

atheist
noun
a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.

Secular humanists believe that this is the only life of which we have certain knowledge and that we owe it to ourselves and others to make it the best life possible for ourselves and all with whom we share this fragile planet. We believe that human beings have made society what it is - the good and the bad.

The concept of developing ethical codes and uniting a group of people under such as an ideological movement is barely different from the actions of any religion anywhere.

@AnuVlad The absence of the super natural (forces or beings) and the absence of "magical thinking," I think makes a huge difference.

Humans evolved as herd animals that form groups for safety. it is just a matter of whethEr or not you want to be a part of he group that says "God will save us if we all run off tht cliff" or the groups that says "it woulD be crazy for us all to run off of that cliff". BIG DIFFERENCE!

Religious groups want you to let their leaders, who supposedly know god's will, think for you. Humanists want you to think for yourself. BIG DIFFERENCE!

1

You've already undermined any chance for proof or dis-proof by putting in "practically" and "-esque" into your statement. If you really want to be shown differently, or to receive meaningful confirmation of your current sentiment, you should phrase it in a manner that is more precise. Also, the burden is on you to better define the meaning of the terms "prove", "humanism", and "religion" such that a useful criterion can be set.

To still engage with the meaningful topic you have raised, I'd start by reconsidering your statement as the following question: Is Humanism a religious ideology?

With that question raised, Humanism, as I understand it on a cursory level, does take some elements inspired from religion, namely recent unorthodox Christian liberalism and ancient pagan philosophy—along with modern scientific insights and non-theistic philosophical developments—to produce an ideological system that attempts to map out a complete world-view, particularly including ethics, metaphysics, personal meaning, and aspirations. (Though the metaphysics is formally one of the least emphasized areas.) These are things which are common to religions, but frankly, must also be common to any complete world-view. Up front, this does not make it a religion necessarily, though it does overlap with spheres of thought that are traditionally emphasized by religions.

Secular Humanism, however, is explicitly tentative about it's bases for the positions it takes in each of these areas of thought, nor does it include anything supernatural. As far as I—and others who I've heard promote Humanism—can tell, these two things set it apart from any "religion" in ordinary senses of the word.

So is Humanism "religion-esque"? Maybe... in that it over-laps with certain areas of thought and is an ideology with a desire to still form communities.

But if it is, then how could you define a complete world-view + related community that isn't "religion-esque"? Then, the problem is that such a concept of religious ideologies (which seems an over-expanded definition to me) risks simply calling every coherent and complete world-view, and any organization around such world-views, "religious/religion".

This misses what seems to me to be the important distinction between religious ideologies and possible non-religious ones, namely supernatural dogma. These are two fundamental ideological components which clearly exist in Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, etc. It is much less clear that this is the case with Secular Humanism, though there is some plausible, reasonable argument about that.

As such, I don't personally consider Humanism religious, though I do recognize there are some parallels.

I said what I said in the way that I did for a reason. If I had said "humanism is a religion" then I would hold myself accountable for blatantly using the wrong word for that is not an accurate description given the current definition of "religious." So when I say "religious-esque" I mean this as a verb, meaning in practice, Secular Humanism comes off as a religious ideology, but without the failings/trappings of metaphysical belief systems.

@AnuVlad Yes, and I find that mostly understandable. It's hard to argue that going to a Humanist church service isn't "religious-esque." However, I'm not convinced that calling it that is all that helpful, and it is somewhat inaccurate, as Humanism isn't a religion in the traditional sense. It is a community centered around an ideology, and so I'd prefer to refer to a Humanist meeting merely as a community, as I've heard some others do. But like any other religious or non-religious community, there are still a lot of related pitfalls (as well as benefits), just through the problems of mere nature of human groups.

On the topic of Humanism, here's an interesting discussion between three atheists. It's probably worth your while in the context of this conversation. I'm by no means settled on any of the three positions alluded to. [richarddawkins.net]

0

Why?

Western Culture has Abrahamic values embedded in every facet of its culture.

cava Level 7 May 8, 2018

Im ok speaking anout the us . it may have a few of it value but it no made from them. The us is the first secular country founded and it wasnt founded on abrahamic values.
Only 2 us law you can claim may have can from it stealing and killing but our law are far better them the law of any holy book.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:76279
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.