Secular Humanism is not supposed to make you happy

[_Some Schmo]

I don't consider myself a secular humanist. The few I've become acquainted with in the real world have been annoying and take themselves way too seriously. Video clips I've watched of secular humanist organizations lead me to believe I'd just want to kill myself if I ever attended one of those meetings. The Humanist Manifesto is also kind of gay.

It would be crazy to think secular humanism doesn't strive for the betterment of self and humanity and this would in fact demand a minimal conception of happiness, and obviously since they denounce faith, they would have to believe reason then would be a primary vehicle in achieving those ends. How the details would be fleshed out when truth conflicts with fun, honestly, I doubt have a rigorously defined and universal accepted answer.

I of course think they are too optimistic, that humanity just isn't built to be happy, overall. I don't hink there are any obvious answers for solving the problem of happiness. And I think, even given how negative I may come across, that I am happier than any secular humanist I've met in person.

But back on target, I think to really compare the happiness aspect to religion it has to be understood that religion is offering eternal bliss and complete fulfillment. If secular humanism thinks that reason will lead to a utopia, then I can handle the comparison to religion. But it doesn't. And any life philosophy that doesn't have minimal happiness as part of the objective would be moronic.

Hmmm... I don't know about that. I guess it somewhat depends on how you define happiness.

Couldn't it be that some people aren't really striving for happiness, but merely contentment? I don't know about you, but happiness is never a constant state for me (nor is any other emotion, for that matter). Happiness comes in bite-sized pieces. I think anyone who's looking for a philosophy on the basis of "will it make me happy" is setting themselves up for massive disappointment, no matter where they look. It's simply unrealistic. Life involves way too much pain.

I actually think that's one of the major problems with selling any point of view on the basis of happiness (ie religion). It's doomed to fail, and people just end of feeling worse because happiness failed them, and they often think it's their own fault. If people who call themselves secular humanists are doing it for that end, then that's a problem.

For me, seeking the truth based on rational thought and observable evidence is an endeavor in minimizing pain, not obtaining constant pleasure.

by the way, I don't consider myself a secular humanist either. I don't really call myself anything which provides commentary on my philosophy, but if I had to pick something, I guess I'd go with rationalist or realist, as those fit best. At the very least, those are my priorities.

[_Gadianton]

All I'm saying Schmo is that happiness isn't always strictly running around in a park with cotton candy overjoyed. Being better off or even content is part of being happy, on a basic level. I can't even imagine the point of having a life philosophy and applying it daily if some minimal happiness for one's self and betterment for others isn't the goal. I'm open to suggestions, but I really can't think of any notable secular thinkers who have seen perfect harmony, continual pleasure, and life free of pain as the end result of applying secular reasoning. That's much different than religions which think their beliefs will lead to immortality and everlasting smiles in heaven with harps and Jesus bouncing the kids on his knee.

Tarski,

Had I not encountered a particular club that refered to themselves as secular humanists I might not be as turned off. I've never met more pretentious and overly serious people. Also, I think if you dig deeper into that article it says something about a more narrow definition of the term as it might be associated with actual movements and proponents of the term demanding more from those who style themselves as such than disbelieving in God while believing in using reason to better the world.

I'm also wary of any kind of devotion to one particular document such as the Humanist Manifesto. Mainly because while it might be interesting and better thought out than the Law of Moses, the cool thing about freeing oneself from the shackles of religion is one realizes how complex and interesting the world can be. My own limited probing into ethics has left me far from feeling like I have final answers and sans God there is plenty of room yet for disagreements and difference of opinion.

[_Some Schmo]

All I'm saying Schmo is that happiness isn't always strictly running around in a park with cotton candy overjoyed. Being better off or even content is part of being happy, on a basic level. I can't even imagine the point of having a life philosophy and applying it daily if some minimal happiness for one's self and betterment for others isn't the goal. I'm open to suggestions, but I really can't think of any notable secular thinkers who have seen perfect harmony, continual pleasure, and life free of pain as the end result of applying secular reasoning. That's much different than religions which think their beliefs will lead to immortality and everlasting smiles in heaven with harps and Jesus bouncing the kids on his knee.

I figured it might be a slight semantics difference regarding the word "happiness" because I tend to agree with basically everything you wrote here.

[_Mercury]

All I'm saying Schmo is that happiness isn't always strictly running around in a park with cotton candy overjoyed.

Damn, NOW you tell me.

[_solomarineris]

Go do another bong hit and leave the heavy intellectual lifting to those better suited to its rigors.

Your belief in Elohim the space god from the star base Kolob is a clear indication you have no intellectual credibility.

Hey, hold on for a minute....
Your ad-hominem toward this guy is an attack to all believers.
Are you saying we, Spagetti Monster God believers also don't have any credibilty? (see Wikipedia for information).

Please bring down your dogmatic assertions a notch or two down.

[_Yoda]

Go do another bong hit and leave the heavy intellectual lifting to those better suited to its rigors.

Merc! Did you get a fresh supply? You promised you would share! Does our friendship mean nothing? ;)

[_Mercury]

Go do another bong hit and leave the heavy intellectual lifting to those better suited to its rigors.

Your belief in Elohim the space god from the star base Kolob is a clear indication you have no intellectual credibility.

Hey, hold on for a minute....
Your ad-hominem toward this guy is an attack to all believers.
Are you saying we, Spagetti Monster God believers also don't have any credibilty? (see Wikipedia for information).

Please bring down your dogmatic assertions a notch or two down.

Why? The ad hom rebuttal is a much thinner paintbrush than you try to paint me with. True, using ones beliefs to determine thought processes and logical reasoning is wro...wait...Huh?

If I came to you and said Blarg the space deity from the Pleiades was telling me to do things in his name I think I would not trust as much of what you say, especially if one is talking of Intellectual Credibility.

[_Mercury]

Go do another bong hit and leave the heavy intellectual lifting to those better suited to its rigors.

Merc! Did you get a fresh supply? You promised you would share! Does our friendship mean nothing? ;)

The wife watches the cash so its hard to get my hands on green. When I come to my ancestral home (pilot mountain) we'll have to smoke up!

[_The Nehor]

Why? The ad hom rebuttal is a much thinner paintbrush than you try to paint me with. True, using ones beliefs to determine thought processes and logical reasoning is wro...wait...Huh?

If I came to you and said Blarg the space deity from the Pleiades was telling me to do things in his name I think I would not trust as much of what you say, especially if one is talking of Intellectual Credibility.

Tell Blarg I said hi next time I talk to him. We were working on cold fusion and I think I've got it figured out.

[_Mercury]

Why? The ad hom rebuttal is a much thinner paintbrush than you try to paint me with. True, using ones beliefs to determine thought processes and logical reasoning is wro...wait...Huh?

If I came to you and said Blarg the space deity from the Pleiades was telling me to do things in his name I think I would not trust as much of what you say, especially if one is talking of Intellectual Credibility.

Tell Blarg I said hi next time I talk to him. We were working on cold fusion and I think I've got it figured out.

Ahh, so you graduated from the U of U. Funny that a falsified study that was trumpeted "from the top of the mountains" turned out to be a beaker full of Tritium and FAIL.