Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 114 (8734 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-27-2017 2:25 PM
461 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Post Volume:
Total: 802,017 Year: 6,623/21,208 Month: 2,384/2,634 Week: 47/525 Day: 22/25 Hour: 3/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
234Next
Author Topic:   A Believers Critique Of The Humanist Manifesto
Phat
Member
Posts: 9260
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 1 of 60 (789846)
08-20-2016 6:38 PM


I was asked to start a topic on my personal religious bias against the three documents that make up the Humanist Manifesto.
Humanist Manifesto
Humanist Manifesti II
Humanist Manifesto III

Everything that I have read from Biblical Christians (who critics call conservative,uninformed, and in a realm of fantasy versus reality) indicates that the world will by and large reject all forms of organized religion due to the fundamentalist oppressive nature of its tenets and will embrace a form of belief in the human animal and our collective potential known as secular humanism.

What does the evidence show us regarding international relations, global finance, the steady decline of the United States both morally and financially, and the rise of false religion the world over?

Are the secular humanists right? Is religion and ancient beliefs threatening a logical and rational future for our planet and ourselves?

Or are the Christian literalists right? Are we all doomed to a bleak future by our actions of rejecting God and seeking to deify ourselves as the ultimate source of wisdom and logic?

Faith & Belief, please

Edited by Phat, : spelling


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by jar, posted 08-20-2016 10:07 PM Phat has responded
 Message 4 by Coyote, posted 08-20-2016 10:22 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 5 by PaulK, posted 08-21-2016 3:36 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 6 by Tangle, posted 08-21-2016 3:49 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 7 by Genomicus, posted 08-21-2016 4:18 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3740
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 2 of 60 (789848)
08-20-2016 9:21 PM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the A Believers Critique Of The Humanist Manifesto thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
    
jar
Member
Posts: 28437
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.6


(2)
Message 3 of 60 (789849)
08-20-2016 10:07 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
08-20-2016 6:38 PM


Where is the problem?
Phat writes:

Everything that I have read from Biblical Christians (who critics call conservative,uninformed, and in a realm of fantasy versus reality) indicates that the world will by and large reject all forms of organized religion due to the fundamentalist oppressive nature of its tenets and will embrace a form of belief in the human animal and our collective potential known as secular humanism.

And if that should happen, where is the problem? Speaking as a Christian and Theist, the evidence seems to show that overall, membership in some religious organization is still relatively common and strong but where is the problem if religions were abandoned?

Phat writes:

What does the evidence show us regarding international relations, global finance, the steady decline of the United States both morally and financially, and the rise of false religion the world over?

Well the evidence show us that international relations have never been as peaceful and cooperative as they are today. Nor is there any evidence of a decline of the United States morally or financially. The most common false religion today seems to be "Biblical Evangelical Fundamentalist Christianity" perhaps followed at a great distance by Radical Fundamentalist Islam.

Phat writes:

Or are the Christian literalists right? Are we all doomed to a bleak future by our actions of rejecting God and seeking to deify ourselves as the ultimate source of wisdom and logic?

You have not shown how rejecting any god or acknowledging humanity as the source of wisdom and logic might be a problem or how there could be any other source of wisdom and logic than humans.


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Phat, posted 08-20-2016 6:38 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Phat, posted 08-21-2016 7:18 PM jar has responded

  
Coyote
Member
Posts: 5540
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 4 of 60 (789850)
08-20-2016 10:22 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
08-20-2016 6:38 PM


Bah!
As a note: I haven't read those humanist manifestos...

Everything that I have read from Biblical Christians (who critics call conservative,uninformed, and in a realm of fantasy versus reality) indicates that the world will by and large reject all forms of organized religion due to the fundamentalist oppressive nature of its tenets and will embrace a form of belief in the human animal and our collective potential known as secular humanism.

Many of us don't see this as a problem. Organized religion has led to immense problems over the past few thousand years. There is no evidence those problems are lessening either.

What does the evidence show us regarding international relations, global finance, the steady decline of the United States both morally and financially, and the rise of false religion the world over?

Are the two related? It is not uncommon for civilizations to rise and fall, and the declines we are seeing are not unprecedented in history. Why would you consider linking this to some form of religion instead of other factors, such as multiculturalism or the decline of nationalism, or just the aging of a civilization? You know the saying, "Its hard to have a decent parade when everyone is dancing to a different drummer." That seems to be what this country is experiencing.

Are the secular humanists right? Is religion and ancient beliefs threatening a logical and rational future for our planet and ourselves?

Religion and ancient beliefs are based on -- beliefs. Beliefs are the opposite of facts and evidence and rationality. As Heinlein noted,

What are the facts? Again and again and again—what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what "the stars foretell," avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable "verdict of history"; what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!

Or are the Christian literalists right? Are we all doomed to a bleak future by our actions of rejecting God and seeking to deify ourselves as the ultimate source of wisdom and logic?

Rejecting god? There are tens of thousands of different christian sects and denominations alone, as well as many thousands of different religions and who knows how many different gods, back in history as well as now. Why so many? Simple: religions and deities are all based on belief, and when there is a disagreement you see a schism rather than using evidence to settle those differences. Religions can't use evidence! They are relying on unevidenced beliefs.

And you want to trust humankind's future to that nonsense?


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein

In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool

It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle

If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1

"Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Phat, posted 08-20-2016 6:38 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 12442
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 5 of 60 (789858)
08-21-2016 3:36 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
08-20-2016 6:38 PM


I'll note that the OP has very little connection to the supposed subject.

quote:

What does the evidence show us regarding international relations, global finance, the steady decline of the United States both morally and financially, and the rise of false religion the world over?

Is there a moral decline in the United States ? In many respects things seem to have improved since the 1950s. Despite the efforts of "Biblical Christians".

quote:

Are the secular humanists right? Is religion and ancient beliefs threatening a logical and rational future for our planet and ourselves?

For an example in the U.S. I would point to "Biblical Christians". I cannot say that all of them are liars who want to destroy freedoms held since the Bill of Rights (or even the passing of the Constitution) or even followers of those liars - but there are enough of them who speak loudly enough to make the point.

quote:

Or are the Christian literalists right? Are we all doomed to a bleak future by our actions of rejecting God and seeking to deify ourselves as the ultimate source of wisdom and logic?

I would say that many add hypocrisy to the lies when they make such claims.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Phat, posted 08-20-2016 6:38 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 4408
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 6 of 60 (789859)
08-21-2016 3:49 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
08-20-2016 6:38 PM


Phat writes:

Everything that I have read from Biblical Christians (who critics call conservative,uninformed, and in a realm of fantasy versus reality) indicates that the world will by and large reject all forms of organized religion due to the fundamentalist oppressive nature of its tenets and will embrace a form of belief in the human animal and our collective potential known as secular humanism.

Of course, this is inevitable and has already happened successfully in most of Western Europe. Knowledge will always overcome superstition.

What does the evidence show us regarding international relations, global finance, the steady decline of the United States both morally and financially, and the rise of false religion the world over?

How are you measuring this financial and moral decline? You've abolished slavery, you no longer hunt and kill aboriginal Americans, you're beginning to understand your racism. You've developed powerful institutions of social justice, education and healthcare. Finacially you're the richest country in the world. You guys need to get out more. You've got a long way to go dealing with inequality and poverty but you've come a long way in a couple of hundred years.

And what's this false religion bollocks? All religions are false except the one you were personally born into? Religious belief is not rising, it's falling. Where are you getting these myths from?


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Phat, posted 08-20-2016 6:38 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Genomicus
Member
Posts: 781
Joined: 02-15-2012
Member Rating: 4.6


(6)
Message 7 of 60 (789874)
08-21-2016 4:18 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
08-20-2016 6:38 PM


What does the evidence show us regarding international relations, global finance, the steady decline of the United States both morally and financially...

Oh, please. That's just your cisgender white male privilege talking. It's ridiculous when people assert that U.S. culture is in "moral decline" just because their positions of privilege and power are finally being challenged from every angle.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Phat, posted 08-20-2016 6:38 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 9260
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 8 of 60 (789876)
08-21-2016 7:18 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by jar
08-20-2016 10:07 PM


Re: Where is the problem?
jar writes:

...where is the problem if religions were abandoned?

Lets look at the original Humanist Manifesto

Several of the statements contained within this document concern me.

  • There is great danger of a final, and we believe fatal, identification of the word religion with doctrines and methods which have lost their significance and which are powerless to solve the problem of human living in the Twentieth Century. So which doctrines and methods do the humanists(most of whom seem to be Unitarians or atheists) find so outdated?
  • Today man's larger understanding of the universe, his scientific achievements, and deeper appreciation of brotherhood, have created a situation which requires a new statement of the means and purposes of religion. So I'm curious how this new statement differs from the Bible and/or traditional belief. The humanists then go on to affirm no less than 15 basic belief statements...many of which I disagree with. Lets take each one individually.

    FIRST: Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created.
    Absolute rubbish! Are they in essence saying the universe created itself or always existed? Where do they get off on denying even so much as the possibility of a Creator? This is what I mean when I said these manifestos were arrogant!
    SECOND: Humanism believes that man is a part of nature and that he has emerged as a result of a continuous process.
    This one isn't so bad. The only danger I see in this affirmation is to state that man is no more special or unique than any other animal. It is quite obvious that no other animal has approached our level of development. God appeared to us as a man. Not a dolphin. Not a Bird. Not an alien. I see no problem with a cautious belief and acknowledgement of biological evolution...provided that ancient religious beliefs are not simply discarded wholesale as human ignorance. There is much that the scientific mind of today cannot prove nor disprove regarding spirituality. Absence of evidence should never conclude evidence of absence.
    THIRD: Holding an organic view of life, humanists find that the traditional dualism of mind and body must be rejected.
    Do they mean the substance or Cartesian dualism made popular through the teachings of Rene Descartes? Are they advocating Holistic Health? If so, I believe that humanity is triparte:

    FOURTH: Humanism recognizes that man's religious culture and civilization, as clearly depicted by anthropology and history, are the product of a gradual development due to his interaction with his natural environment and with his social heritage. The individual born into a particular culture is largely molded by that culture.
    I would agree except to state that God was made man in order to interact with humanity and that even though this is only a belief it is not fair or proper to reject this belief. After all, who made the humanists any sort of final authority on belief?
    FIFTH: Humanism asserts that the nature of the universe depicted by modern science makes unacceptable any supernatural or cosmic guarantees of human values. Obviously humanism does not deny the possibility of realities as yet undiscovered, but it does insist that the way to determine the existence and value of any and all realities is by means of intelligent inquiry and by the assessment of their relations to human needs. Religion must formulate its hopes and plans in the light of the scientific spirit and method.
    The sad thing is, you would probably agree with them on this, jar. And to say that you are a Christian! You have denied Christ in favor of logic, reason, and reality. Its ironic that the so-called reality you embrace is but an illusion in the grand scheme of things. The humanists will, however someday find out that they were wrong all along. The Holy Spirit trumps any sort of scientific "spirit" mentioned.
    SIXTH: We are convinced that the time has passed for theism, deism, modernism, and the several varieties of "new thought".
    Right here says it all. They have declared themselves in opposition to Theism.
    SEVENTH: Religion consists of those actions, purposes, and experiences which are humanly significant. Nothing human is alien to the religious. It includes labor, art, science, philosophy, love, friendship, recreation--all that is in its degree expressive of intelligently satisfying human living. The distinction between the sacred and the secular can no longer be maintained.
    I have no problem with this one.
    EIGHTH: Religious Humanism considers the complete realization of human personality to be the end of man's life and seeks its development and fulfillment in the here and now. This is the explanation of the humanist's social passion.
    It is good to focus on the present. It is all we really have.
    NINTH: In the place of the old attitudes involved in worship and prayer the humanist finds his religious emotions expressed in a heightened sense of personal life and in a cooperative effort to promote social well-being.
    This is expected from people who have nothing to pray to.
    TENTH: It follows that there will be no uniquely religious emotions and attitudes of the kind hitherto associated with belief in the supernatural.
    Here comes the gestapo again! The thought police outlawing any expression of worship towards the supernatural which they in their arrogance and ignorance cannot see.
    ELEVENTH: Man will learn to face the crises of life in terms of his knowledge of their naturalness and probability. Reasonable and manly attitudes will be fostered by education and supported by custom. We assume that humanism will take the path of social and mental hygiene and discourage sentimental and unreal hopes and wishful thinking.
    Discouragement in fantasy is to be encouraged. To label Christian belief as fantasy, however, is going outside of their pay grade. God created them before they had a clue of what to even make up.
    TWELFTH: Believing that religion must work increasingly for joy in living, religious humanists aim to foster the creative in man and to encourage achievements that add to the satisfactions of life.
    I have no problem with this one.
    THIRTEENTH: Religious humanism maintains that all associations and institutions exist for the fulfillment of human life. The intelligent evaluation, transformation, control, and direction of such associations and institutions with a view to the enhancement of human life is the purpose and program of humanism. Certainly religious institutions, their ritualistic forms, ecclesiastical methods, and communal activities must be reconstituted as rapidly as experience allows, in order to function effectively in the modern world.
    define "reconstituted".....
    FOURTEENTH: The humanists are firmly convinced that existing acquisitive and profit-motivated society has shown itself to be inadequate and that a radical change in methods, controls, and motives must be instituted. A socialized and cooperative economic order must be established to the end that the equitable distribution of the means of life be possible. The goal of humanism is a free and universal society in which people voluntarily and intelligently cooperate for the common good. Humanists demand a shared life in a shared world.
    This is where global finance comes in to play. I am for a more fair and just world, but will not surrender my own means of survival to a centralized control so as to redistribute wealth. Furthermore, there aint no global organization gonna ever slap a chip in my hand or insist that I must join their system in order to buy or sell anything. period!
    FIFTEENTH AND LAST: We assert that humanism will: (a) affirm life rather than deny it; (b) seek to elicit the possibilities of life, not flee from them; and (c) endeavor to establish the conditions of a satisfactory life for all, not merely for the few. By this positive morale and intention humanism will be guided, and from this perspective and alignment the techniques and efforts of humanism will flow.
    Consensus has not yet been achieved. There will have to be more give and take before such a unified system is allowed to govern the affairs of this planet. May Gods wisdom prevail.

    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
    ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 3 by jar, posted 08-20-2016 10:07 PM jar has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 9 by jar, posted 08-21-2016 8:13 PM Phat has responded
     Message 12 by PaulK, posted 08-22-2016 12:23 AM Phat has responded
     Message 13 by Tangle, posted 08-22-2016 3:46 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply
     Message 23 by nwr, posted 08-22-2016 10:45 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply
     Message 52 by Modulous, posted 09-15-2016 3:53 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

      
  • jar
    Member
    Posts: 28437
    From: Texas!!
    Joined: 04-20-2004
    Member Rating: 2.6


    (3)
    Message 9 of 60 (789877)
    08-21-2016 8:13 PM
    Reply to: Message 8 by Phat
    08-21-2016 7:18 PM


    Re: Where is the problem?
    Phat writes:

    The sad thing is, you would probably agree with them on this, jar. And to say that you are a Christian! You have denied Christ in favor of logic, reason, and reality. Its ironic that the so-called reality you embrace is but an illusion in the grand scheme of things. The humanists will, however someday find out that they were wrong all along. The Holy Spirit trumps any sort of scientific "spirit" mentioned.

    Try telling the truth for a change Phat and stop lying.

    Phat writes:

    This one isn't so bad. The only danger I see in this affirmation is to state that man is no more special or unique than any other animal. It is quite obvious that no other animal has approached our level of development. God appeared to us as a man. Not a dolphin. Not a Bird. Not an alien. I see no problem with a cautious belief and acknowledgement of biological evolution...provided that ancient religious beliefs are not simply discarded wholesale as human ignorance. There is much that the scientific mind of today cannot prove nor disprove regarding spirituality. Absence of evidence should never conclude evidence of absence.

    Humans wrote the stories in the Bibles and wrote them for humans and so of course the characters in the stories are humans.

    What is wrong with disregarding ancient religious beliefs? You disregard almost all ancient religious beliefs. You disregard Thor and Zeus and Apollo and Coyote and Ganesha and Ra and Anubus and Ma'at and Eros and Uranus and Shiva and Brahma as well as literally thousands of other ancient gods and religious beliefs. You discard Islam and Judaism and Taoism and Confucianism and Zoroastrianism and Hinduism and Buddism and Shintoism as well as the German and Norse and English and Celtic pagan religions.

    Phat writes:

    I would agree except to state that God was made man in order to interact with humanity and that even though this is only a belief it is not fair or proper to reject this belief. After all, who made the humanists any sort of final authority on belief?

    The same folk that made you a final authority Phat.

    Phat writes:

    Right here says it all. They have declared themselves in opposition to Theism.

    And what is wrong with that?

    You go on and on echoing your disagreement but you never present any support or reason or logic for why your position has any more merit than their position.

    Edited by jar, : forgot to include the paragraph where Phat again misrepresents my position and alleges facts not in evidence.


    My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 8 by Phat, posted 08-21-2016 7:18 PM Phat has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 10 by Phat, posted 08-21-2016 10:03 PM jar has responded

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 9260
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.9


    Message 10 of 60 (789886)
    08-21-2016 10:03 PM
    Reply to: Message 9 by jar
    08-21-2016 8:13 PM


    Re: Where is the problem?
    jar writes:

    You disregard almost all ancient religious beliefs. You disregard Thor and Zeus and Apollo and Coyote and Ganesha and Ra and Anubis and Ma'at and Eros and Uranus and Shiva and Brahma as well as literally thousands of other ancient gods and religious beliefs. You discard Islam and Judaism and Taoism and Confucianism and Zoroastrianism and Hinduism and Buddhism and Shintoism as well as the German and Norse and English and Celtic pagan religions.

    Some folks believe that there are many truths. I believe there is one truth. Some folks believe that there are many ways to believe and that it is arrogant to assume that one has the correct belief if such a thing exists. Perhaps I am arrogant, but I find it hard to compromise without weakening my basic stance.
    You go on and on echoing your disagreement but you never present any support or reason or logic for why your position has any more merit than their position.
    Quite likely I am, as Dr.A. suggests, a presuppositionalist.

    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
    ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 9 by jar, posted 08-21-2016 8:13 PM jar has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 11 by jar, posted 08-21-2016 10:34 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply
     Message 56 by Taq, posted 09-16-2016 12:44 PM Phat has responded

      
    jar
    Member
    Posts: 28437
    From: Texas!!
    Joined: 04-20-2004
    Member Rating: 2.6


    Message 11 of 60 (789889)
    08-21-2016 10:34 PM
    Reply to: Message 10 by Phat
    08-21-2016 10:03 PM


    Re: Where is the problem?
    Phat writes:

    jar writes:

    You disregard almost all ancient religious beliefs. You disregard Thor and Zeus and Apollo and Coyote and Ganesha and Ra and Anubis and Ma'at and Eros and Uranus and Shiva and Brahma as well as literally thousands of other ancient gods and religious beliefs. You discard Islam and Judaism and Taoism and Confucianism and Zoroastrianism and Hinduism and Buddhism and Shintoism as well as the German and Norse and English and Celtic pagan religions.

    Some folks believe that there are many truths. I believe there is one truth. Some folks believe that there are many ways to believe and that it is arrogant to assume that one has the correct belief if such a thing exists. Perhaps I am arrogant, but I find it hard to compromise without weakening my basic stance.

    Yet you disregard many ancient religious beliefs so what is wrong with disregarding one more?

    Phat writes:

    jar writes:

    You go on and on echoing your disagreement but you never present any support or reason or logic for why your position has any more merit than their position.

    Quite likely I am, as Dr.A. suggests, a presuppositionalist.

    Which may well be true but offers nothing to support that position.


    My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 10 by Phat, posted 08-21-2016 10:03 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

      
    PaulK
    Member
    Posts: 12442
    Joined: 01-10-2003
    Member Rating: 2.5


    (4)
    Message 12 of 60 (789897)
    08-22-2016 12:23 AM
    Reply to: Message 8 by Phat
    08-21-2016 7:18 PM


    Re: Where is the problem?
    So basically your objection is that humanists have beliefs that you don't like. Thus you call them arrogant and invent false accusations against them.
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 8 by Phat, posted 08-21-2016 7:18 PM Phat has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 14 by Phat, posted 08-22-2016 5:32 AM PaulK has responded

        
    Tangle
    Member
    Posts: 4408
    From: UK
    Joined: 10-07-2011
    Member Rating: 2.8


    (1)
    Message 13 of 60 (789904)
    08-22-2016 3:46 AM
    Reply to: Message 8 by Phat
    08-21-2016 7:18 PM


    Re: Where is the problem?
    Astonishing isn't it, some people have beliefs that differ from yours?

    Phat writes:

    Perhaps I am arrogant, but I find it hard to compromise without weakening my basic stance.

    Well, exactly. Other views - however reasonable or evidence based - must be dismissed at all costs because they might challenge your own. If there was one single reason why irrational belief sysyems need to be replaced, this is it.


    Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

    Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

    "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
    Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
    - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 8 by Phat, posted 08-21-2016 7:18 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 9260
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.9


    Message 14 of 60 (789907)
    08-22-2016 5:32 AM
    Reply to: Message 12 by PaulK
    08-22-2016 12:23 AM


    Re: Where is the problem?
    PaulK writes:

    So basically your objection is that humanists have beliefs that you don't like. Thus you call them arrogant and invent false accusations against them.

    Where did i invent any false accusations? jar is the only one whining that I always misrepresent him. At any rate, lets move on to Humanist Manifesto II shall we?
    quote:
    It is forty years since Humanist Manifesto I (1933) appeared. Events since then make that earlier statement seem far too optimistic. Nazism has shown the depths of brutality of which humanity is capable. Other totalitarian regimes have suppressed human rights without ending poverty. Science has sometimes brought evil as well as good. Recent decades have shown that inhuman wars can be made in the name of peace. The beginnings of police states, even in democratic societies, widespread government espionage, and other abuses of power by military, political, and industrial elites, and the continuance of unyielding racism, all present a different and difficult social outlook.
    They start out sounding a bit more realistic. Humans are a bit more evil than they presupposed.
    As we approach the twenty-first century, however, an affirmative and hopeful vision is needed. Faith, commensurate with advancing knowledge, is also necessary.
    Science and critical thinking can't solve everything! Its about time the humanists came around...or is it?
    As in 1933, humanists still believe that traditional theism, especially faith in the prayer-hearing God, assumed to live and care for persons, to hear and understand their prayers, and to be able to do something about them, is an unproved and outmoded faith. Salvationism, based on mere affirmation, still appears as harmful, diverting people with false hopes of heaven hereafter. Reasonable minds look to other means for survival.
    Still rejecting Theism, I see. So what is it they suggest we have faith in?
    Using technology wisely, we can control our environment, conquer poverty, markedly reduce disease, extend our life-span, significantly modify our behavior, alter the course of human evolution and cultural development, unlock vast new powers, and provide humankind with unparalleled opportunity for achieving an abundant and meaningful life.
    Yes...but
    Faced with apocalyptic prophesies and doomsday scenarios, many flee in despair from reason and embrace irrational cults and theologies of withdrawal and retreat.
    Traditional moral codes and newer irrational cults both fail to meet the pressing needs of today and tomorrow. False "theologies of hope" and messianic ideologies, substituting new dogmas for old, cannot cope with existing world realities. They separate rather than unite peoples.
    OK, I'll give everyone this one. Historically, religion has separated more often than it has united people. This is, however, not the fault of Jesus Christ....or is it?
    Matthew 10:34-39 writes:

    "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 3 For I have come to turn
    "'a man against his father,
    a daughter against her mother,
    a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law-
    a man's enemies will be the members of his own household.'

    37 "Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; 38 and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.

    So we must ask ourselves if that was part of Jesus plan
    and if so, why?
    Back to the manifesto II:
    The ultimate goal should be the fulfillment of the potential for growth in each human personality - not for the favored few, but for all of humankind. Only a shared world and global measures will suffice.
    Sound rather noble so far...
    Free thought, atheism, agnosticism, skepticism, deism, rationalism, ethical culture, and liberal religion all claim to be heir to the humanist tradition. Humanism traces its roots from ancient China, classical Greece and Rome, through the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, to the scientific revolution of the modern world. But views that merely reject theism are not equivalent to humanism. They lack commitment to the positive belief in the possibilities of human progress and to the values central to it. Many within religious groups, believing in the future of humanism, now claim humanist credentials.
    This seems more realistic than the first manifesto where they sought to eliminate theism altogether! Lets continue...
    They discuss Religion specifically.
    FIRST: In the best sense, religion may inspire dedication to the highest ethical ideals. The cultivation of moral devotion and creative imagination is an expression of genuine "spiritual" experience and aspiration.
    We believe, however, that traditional dogmatic or authoritarian religions that place revelation, God, ritual, or creed above human needs and experience do a disservice to the human species. Any account of nature should pass the tests of scientific evidence; in our judgment, the dogmas and myths of traditional religions do not do so. Even at this late date in human history, certain elementary facts based upon the critical use of scientific reason have to be restated. We find insufficient evidence for belief in the existence of a supernatural; it is either meaningless or irrelevant to the question of survival and fulfillment of the human race. As non-theists, we begin with humans not God, nature not deity. Nature may indeed be broader and deeper than we now know; any new discoveries, however, will but enlarge our knowledge of the natural.
    See Tangle, they are speaking your language! You also, PaulK.
    We need, instead, radically new human purposes and goals.
    We appreciate the need to preserve the best ethical teachings in the religious traditions of humankind, many of which we share in common. But we reject those features of traditional religious morality that deny humans a full appreciation of their own potentialities and responsibilities.
    Jar,you have often mentioned responsibility as being the ingredient lacking in Biblical Christianity. Sounds like these humanists are preaching to a friendly choir here at EvC apart from dogmatic obstructionists such as myself!

    Too often traditional faiths encourage dependence rather than independence, obedience rather than affirmation, fear rather than courage. More recently they have generated concerned social action, with many signs of relevance appearing in the wake of the "God Is Dead" theologies. But we can discover no divine purpose or providence for the human species. While there is much that we do not know, humans are responsible for what we are or will become. No deity will save us; we must save ourselves.
    Of course I disagree. We cannot save ourselves. I am quite sure that most of you feel the same as these humanists affirm, however. Lets continue.
    SECOND: Promises of immortal salvation or fear of eternal damnation are both illusory and harmful. They distract humans from present concerns, from self-actualization, and from rectifying social injustices.
    See, Tangle. They speak your language!
    Traditional religions are surely not the only obstacles to human progress. Other ideologies also impede human advance. Some forms of political doctrine, for instance, function religiously, reflecting the worst features of orthodoxy and authoritarianism, especially when they sacrifice individuals on the altar of Utopian promises.
    Hmmmm is that directed towards Hillary or The Donald?
    THIRD: We affirm that moral values derive their source from human experience. Ethics is autonomous and situational needing no theological or ideological sanction. Ethics stems from human need and interest. To deny this distorts the whole basis of life. Human life has meaning because we create and develop our futures.
    In other words, they would deride the basic Biblical Christian assumption of Original Sin. They do have a positive outlook, however.
    FOURTH: Reason and intelligence are the most effective instruments that humankind possesses. There is no substitute: neither faith nor passion suffices in itself. The controlled use of scientific methods, which have transformed the natural and social sciences since the Renaissance, must be extended further in the solution of human problems. But reason must be tempered by humility, since no group has a monopoly of wisdom or virtue.
    I like the fact that they stress the need for humility.
    FIFTH: The preciousness and dignity of the individual person is a central humanist value.(...)We reject all religious, ideological, or moral codes that denigrate the individual, suppress freedom, dull intellect, dehumanize personality.
    I won't argue this position. Who would want to?
    SIXTH: In the area of sexuality, we believe that intolerant attitudes, often cultivated by orthodox religions and puritanical cultures, unduly repress sexual conduct. (...)Short of harming others or compelling them to do likewise, individuals should be permitted to express their sexual proclivities and pursue their lifestyles as they desire.
    Although the fundamentalists and charismaniacal Christians won't agree with this stance, I believe that it is inevitable and is in and of itself not a bad thing. Tolerance should be encouraged. My only concern regarding sexuality is whether humans really understand what love is beyond love for each other. Look at the words of Jesus:
    Matthew 22:37-40 writes:

    Jesus replied: "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

    I personally believe that human love is incomplete without the first commandment. Humanists believe in humans more than they believe in God. Thus we disagree.
    SEVENTH: To enhance freedom and dignity the individual must experience a full range of civil liberties in all societies. This includes freedom of speech and the press, political democracy, the legal right of opposition to governmental policies, fair judicial process, religious liberty, freedom of association, and artistic, scientific, and cultural freedom. It also includes a recognition of an individual's right to die with dignity, euthanasia, and the right to suicide.
    No argument here.
    EIGHTH: We are committed to an open and democratic society. We must extend participatory democracy in its true sense to the economy, the school, the family, the workplace, and voluntary associations. (...)People are more important than decalogues, rules, proscriptions, or regulations.
    I agree with this.
    NINTH: The separation of church and state and the separation of ideology and state are imperatives.
    Inevitable, though I am not in favor of making Christianity equal with everything else...dogmatic obstructionist that I am. Pray for me.
    TENTH: Humane societies should evaluate economic systems not by rhetoric or ideology, but by whether or not they increase economic well-being for all individuals and groups, minimize poverty and hardship, increase the sum of human satisfaction, and enhance the quality of life.
    No objection there.
    ELEVENTH: The principle of moral equality must be furthered through elimination of all discrimination based upon race, religion, sex, age, or national origin.(they are in favor of a minimum guaranteed income for those who cannot work)We are concerned for the welfare of the aged, the infirm, the disadvantaged, and also for the outcasts - the mentally retarded, abandoned, or abused children, the handicapped, prisoners, and addicts - for all who are neglected or ignored by society.
    My only protest here is that this is economically impossible to implement at a global level. The standard of living would drop too far. I don't know what alternatives would avoid this, however.
    TWELFTH: We deplore the division of humankind on nationalistic grounds.
    They advocate a basic new world order and one world government. I am not optimistic regarding our readiness for such a system nor our ability to govern it. I believe that God should be at the head of any world government...though it appears He has not returned yet to assume His throne.
    THIRTEENTH: This world community must renounce the resort to violence and force as a method of solving international disputes.
    Great in theory...but how could they hope to turn off global violence?
    FOURTEENTH: The world community must engage in cooperative planning concerning the use of rapidly depleting resources.
    How will they implement global discipline to achieve such aims?
    FIFTEENTH: The problems of economic growth and development can no longer be resolved by one nation alone; they are worldwide in scope.
    The United States won't like being displaced as global cop by a one world system.
    SIXTEENTH: Technology is a vital key to human progress and development.
    No argument here.
    SEVENTEENTH: We must expand communication and transportation across frontiers. Travel restrictions must cease. The world must be open to diverse political, ideological, and moral viewpoints and evolve a worldwide system of television and radio for information and education.
    And how will terrorism suddenly go away? How will that problem be solved?
    IN CLOSING: The world cannot wait for a reconciliation of competing political or economic systems to solve its problems.(...)Let us call for an end to terror and hatred. (...)At the present juncture of history, commitment to all humankind is the highest commitment of which we are capable; it transcends the narrow allegiances of church, state, party, class, or race in moving toward a wider vision of human potentiality.
    So there you have it.
    Comments?

    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
    ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 12 by PaulK, posted 08-22-2016 12:23 AM PaulK has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 15 by PaulK, posted 08-22-2016 5:39 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply
     Message 16 by jar, posted 08-22-2016 9:32 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply
     Message 17 by Riggamortis, posted 08-22-2016 9:36 AM Phat has responded
     Message 53 by Modulous, posted 09-15-2016 5:17 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

      
    PaulK
    Member
    Posts: 12442
    Joined: 01-10-2003
    Member Rating: 2.5


    Message 15 of 60 (789908)
    08-22-2016 5:39 AM
    Reply to: Message 14 by Phat
    08-22-2016 5:32 AM


    Re: Where is the problem?
    quote:

    Where did i invent any false accusations?

    Does this ring any bells ?


    Here comes the gestapo again! The thought police outlawing any expression of worship towards the supernatural which they in their arrogance and ignorance cannot see.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 14 by Phat, posted 08-22-2016 5:32 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

        
    1
    234Next
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.0 Beta
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017