What is secular humanism?

[Michael57]

This may be true of some atheists, but for me secualr humanism is much more than a rejection of religion. I don’t think it even necessarily entail a rejection of religion. What is does entail, IMO is the rejection of religion as a decisive factor in what is good or not good for human beings/humanity.

I used to be Catholic humanist, but my views on most things haven’t changed since I became an atheist.

And yet, here you are.

An atheist posting on a Catholic website. I think that is delightful.

I am saddened by your present state, but hopeful that God will give you the grace of faith in Him. And I am somewhat amused by all of the atheists that seem compelled to post here. A good sign I think.

I will add you to my prayers, for your eternal soul and your return to the Church.

 

[belorg]

And yet, here you are.

An atheist posting on a Catholic website. I think that is delightful.

Thank you.

I am saddened by your present state, but hopeful that God will give you the grace of faith in Him. And I am somewhat amused by all of the atheists that seem compelled to post here. A good sign I think.

I am in a better state than before, but, again, thank you.

I will add you to my prayers, for your eternal soul and your return to the Church.

According to you, that is up to the grace of God, your prayers won’t matter, but thanks anyway.

 

[belorg]

Thanks for everyone’s (name removed by moderator)ut.

It seems that the vast majority of people in history would think that too. Pretty much every civilization which has ever existed thought that humans were “valuable” in some sense and that it’s good to “flourish.” So … I feel like I still don’t have a grasp on what “humanism” means here.

Strange, because from what you are saying here, it seems you do have a grasp.
The vast majority of people in history are probably right.

I feel like you might be right. But I’m not really sure why.

If you are a Christian, you shoud know why.

But it could involve unorganized religion? Private religious practice that involve prayers, etc.?

That depends on what you mean by “religion”.

 

[Michael57]

Thank you.

You are welcome.

I am in a better state than before, but, again, thank you.

Your opinion, and opinions, like mileage, may vary.

According to you, that is up to the grace of God, your prayers won’t matter, but thanks anyway.

No, that’s according to God. He informs me that prayers do matter, and that took a great deal of convincing, for I was very skeptical, now less so…though still a fault of mine at times.

I’m not perfect (far from it)…but I aspire to perfect faith as God enables me in this earthly life.

So…whether you think it matters or not is really not up to you, my friend, it is between my Lord and I.

I had a friend that I loved as a brother, he was an ardent atheist. We respected each others opinion about the subject.

He passed away a few years ago, as a Christian at the very end. I had nothing to do with his conversion, but I always prayed for him too.

Still do. So, praying for you now too.

Peace be with you.

 

[Areopagite]

Strange, because from what you are saying here, it seems you do have a grasp.

What do you mean?

The vast majority of people in history are probably right.

You mean the vast majority of people in history are humanist? Or right? Or both?

If you are a Christian, you shoud know why.

I probably should. But I don’t think I do.

That depends on what you mean by “religion”.

Well, what did you mean by “religion” when you said “secular” means that it doesn’t “involve organized religion.”

Sorry, these topics might seem obvious to you, but to me, you’re speaking rather cryptically.

 

[Areopagite]

Humanism, in the non-philosophical sense of the word, is a synonym of humanitarianism.

And are you saying that Christian humanism refers to this kind?

This [Humanism is a focus on human beings as opposed to a focus on the Divine] is the philosophical definition of it. It’s somewhat like deism, only instead of observing at the world to discover God, you observe it to discover what is ethical for humanity.

So … humanism is observing the world to find out what’s ethical for humanity. That’s what you’re saying, right?

 

[Bradski]

And are you saying that Christian humanism refers to this kind?

All Christians are Humanists. But not all Humanists are Christians because not all Humanists believe in God.

 

[HardRockGTR]

And are you saying that Christian humanism refers to this kind?

Yes, in a practical sense, but as previously said, not all humanists are Christian.

So … humanism is observing the world to find out what’s ethical for humanity. That’s what you’re saying, right?

Yes, in a philosophical sense.

 

[belorg]

What do you mean?

What you said about people and civilizations in history is pretty much what humanism is all about.
Except that under humanism “it’s good to flourish” means that it’s good for the whole of humanity to flourish.

You mean the vast majority of people in history are humanist? Or right? Or both?

The vast majority of people in history are humanist and right in that respect.

I probably should. But I don’t think I do.

You are getting there.

Well, what did you mean by “religion” when you said “secular” means that it doesn’t “involve organized religion.”

Sorry, these topics might seem obvious to you, but to me, you’re speaking rather cryptically.

If religion means something like "having one’s moral actions depend on a supernatural being for " then humanism does not and cannot involve this.
If it means believing in a supernatyraul being but letting oneself guide by the care for humanity, then it can be compatible.

 

[belorg]

Your opinion, and opinions, like mileage, may vary.

That’s not my opinion, that’s a fact.

No, that’s according to God. He informs me that prayers do matter, and that took a great deal of convincing, for I was very skeptical, now less so…though still a fault of mine at times.

I’m not perfect (far from it)…but I aspire to perfect faith as God enables me in this earthly life.

So…whether you think it matters or not is really not up to you, my friend, it is between my Lord and I.

No, it is not up to me, but neither is it up to you.
If God has decides for eternity to send me grace, he will do so, in the other case, no matter how hard you pray, it won’t happen. So my fate and yours has been determined since the beginning. That’s what you position entails.

I had a friend that I loved as a brother, he was an ardent atheist. We respected each others opinion about the subject.

He passed away a few years ago, as a Christian at the very end. I had nothing to do with his conversion, but I always prayed for him too.

Because that’s what God had decided all along.

Still do. So, praying for you now too.

Peace be with you.

Well, thank you. I know your intentions are good, you sound like a humanist to me.

 

[Used2beSherryG]

The same vast misunderstanding here. Secular humanists do not live for themselves, they live for themselves and the other human beings.
Doing that, they end up living by the Ten Commandments, with the exception of the first one.

Of course not every secular humanist succeeds in doing so, but not every Christian or Catholic manages to live up to what he/she is supposed to do either.

You mean the ten commandments given to us by God? This is very surprising. On one hand you claim there is no God, on the other hand you claim to live by these same commandments, except for #1. If there is no God, then why bother living by God’s commandments? If, as you say, there is no God and no eternal life, the idea that you are living by God’s laws makes no sense at all. And do you take it upon yourself to decide what is good for mankind in light of what is good for you personally?

 

[HardRockGTR]

You mean the ten commandments given to us by God? This is very surprising. On one hand you claim there is no God, on the other hand you claim to live by these same commandments, except for #1. If there is no God, then why bother living by God’s commandments? If, as you say, there is no God and no eternal life, the idea that you are living by God’s laws makes no sense at all. And do you take it upon yourself to decide what is good for mankind in light of what is good for you personally?

I think he means that a ‘good’ secular humanist will live up to the nine latter commandments by virtue of behaving well, not the other way around.

 

[belorg]

You mean the ten commandments given to us by God? This is very surprising. On one hand you claim there is no God, on the other hand you claim to live by these same commandments, except for #1. If there is no God, then why bother living by God’s commandments? If, as you say, there is no God and no eternal life, the idea that you are living by God’s laws makes no sense at all. And do you take it upon yourself to decide what is good for mankind in light of what is good for you personally?

No, I take it upon mankind, working and thinking together to decide what is good for us.
Those nine ‘commandments’ are not real commandments. they are mrely ‘commanded’ by common sense, not just be my sense.

 

[belorg]

I think he means that a ‘good’ secular humanist will live up to the nine latter commandments by virtue of behaving well, not the other way around.

Indeed, except that this holds for every true humanist, whether secualr or not.
If morality is to be centered around what’s good for God, then humanity is lost, except if what’s good for God is also good for humanity, in which case God is redundant as far as this matter goes.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

You mean the ten commandments given to us by God? This is very surprising. On one hand you claim there is no God, on the other hand you claim to live by these same commandments, except for #1.

It’s more likely 1-3 by the Catholic numbering (or 1-4 in the protestant numbering). They all have to do with Worship and respect for God. A non-religious person might not see these as relevant beyond how conformance or violation impacts one’s standing within their social community. Whether or not people follow behaviour that aligns with the tenth commandment is a bit of a question to me, especially in a capitalist society.

 

[Used2beSherryG]

I think he means that a ‘good’ secular humanist will live up to the nine latter commandments by virtue of behaving well, not the other way around.

Sa that would mean that a “good” secular humanist must have developed some standard about good and evil. If we are human animals who have a finite existence, why bother to follow the standards set by the fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh , eighth commandments? How can you explain or account for developing a sense of “right” and “wrong”. Certainly you could excuse stealing if you really needed something more than the person who owned it? Perhaps if you had an ‘ok’ paycheck that would not allow you to own some luxury items while another person had way too much money and probably did not even deserve to have it all, you could decide that what was good for you and even in some way for ‘mankind’ would be to take away from one who has so much to make your life better . Socialism would sound like a good idea to a human secularist, wouldn’t it? I am trying to understand your mindset about the 'what is good for mankind. Would you agree that you have a “conscience”? and if so, where did this come from?

 

[HardRockGTR]

Sa that would mean that a “good” secular humanist must have developed some standard about good and evil. If we are human animals who have a finite existence, why bother to follow the standards set by the fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh , eighth commandments? How can you explain or account for developing a sense of “right” and “wrong”.

There are different approaches to it from a naturalist’s point of view (I don’t want to use “atheist” because that could refer to a Buddhist or Jain): evolutionary morality (standards that are hard-wired into our brains), utilitarianism, non-cognitivism, nihilism, relativism, morality that changes with time and culture, and so on.

Personally, I believe it is more likely that objective, static morality exists, but I have reasons to believe the opposite as well. I just lean on one side a lot more. I do not condone utilitarianism, nihilism nor relativism, which all have, in my opinion, very weak foundations.

Certainly you could excuse stealing if you really needed something more than the person who owned it?

Yes. If my little brother and I are orphans and we’re starving to death, it would be wrong for me not to steal bananas from the market. It doesn’t have to be caviar or foie gras, as long as I can survive another day. Granted, it would be far better to work legitimately for it, but if I have no other choice, then I have no other choice.

Perhaps if you had an ‘ok’ paycheck that would not allow you to own some luxury items while another person had way too much money and probably did not even deserve to have it all, you could decide that what was good for you and even in some way for ‘mankind’ would be to take away from one who has so much to make your life better.

Humans don’t need luxury items.

Socialism would sound like a good idea to a human secularist, wouldn’t it?

From the non-politically-educated standpoint of mine, socialism sounds marvelous, at least theoretically.

Sharing? I’m fairly certain that’s necessary for good people, let alone Christians.

I am trying to understand your mindset about the 'what is good for mankind. Would you agree that you have a “conscience”? and if so, where did this come from?

Note that I didn’t make the claim that a good humanist will live up to the nine latter commandments; that was someone else. I was merely rewording what he or she said. I personally wouldn’t say the nine latter commandments, since the first five apply to God.

First, we need to philosophically define conscience, which is a task and a half. Only then can we have a cognitivist approach to the issue. A naturalist will argue that conscience arises naturally and because of the laws of physics present in the universe and because of biological development; sometimes by presenting those very laws. I’m in no way a scientist (merely a geeky science fan) and have not yet been able to define consciousness on my own, so I might not be the best person to debate with on this matter.

 

[Michael57]

That’s not my opinion, that’s a fact.

As you wish.

No, it is not up to me, but neither is it up to you.

So you believe.

If God has decides for eternity to send me grace, he will do so, in the other case, no matter how hard you pray, it won’t happen. So my fate and yours has been determined since the beginning. That’s what you position entails.

Calvinism and a belief in “Fate” are not a part of my Catholic faith. God gives us free will. God desires that we choose Him freely, and He gives us every aid in doing this, even His only begotten Son.

Because that’s what God had decided all along.

Again with the “Fate” idea. All things are preordained? No. I don’t believe that’s true at all.

Well, thank you. I know your intentions are good, you sound like a humanist to me.

Well, I may sound that way to you, but I am a Catholic. Thank you very much.

God bless you.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Well, I may sound that way to you, but I am a Catholic. Thank you very much.

I thought “Catholic” and “Humanist” were not mutually exclusive.

 

[belorg]

I thought “Catholic” and “Humanist” were not mutually exclusive.

I sincerely hope they aren’t.