Is Secular Humanism a Fraud? (essay 1 now added)

[_Moniker]

I'm such a poor atheist and a secular humanist! No one wants me! :(

We at Apatheists Anonymous will have you. If you turn down that offer from Hotties R Us.

Well, I've increasingly become less apathetic toward religious beliefs (when they enter the political realm) -- so that's a no go for me, too!

[_Bond...James Bond]

I'm such a poor atheist and a secular humanist! No one wants me! :(

We at Apatheists Anonymous will have you. If you turn down that offer from Hotties R Us.

Well, I've increasingly become less apathetic toward religious beliefs (when they enter the political realm) -- so that's a no go for me, too!

Well me too. But I guess I'm more worried about the religious views (particularly social concerns) being politicized than the actual religion.

[_Tal Bachman]

Hi amigos

So far, my essay series here is looking like a total bust.

I can't even get anyone to concede that in a profound way, secular humanism is committed to intellectual "enlightenment" as crucial to increasing human happiness.

Maybe we should put this thing out of its misery...

[_Moniker]

Tal, I actually enjoy your essay seen on this thread (and other threads) -- I just don't see the that secular humanists are making a correlation with knowledge and human happiness. There are ways to evaluate situations and determine the best way to proceed to reduce human misfortune and to optimize happiness -- yet, knowledge in and of itself does not do anything to produce happiness.

Take this for instance:

We know more now as a species than we have ever known, yet there is no empirical evidence that we are any happier than our ancestors were.

I agree with that. Yet, with the ability to look at what we know and make decisions based on a trial and error basis we can decide which options are best to take. The knowledge itself does not lead anywhere -- it can be knowledge that can be painful or not even useful particularly.

Maybe I'm missing the point. That's most likely it.

[_William Schryver]

However, certain criticisms of secular humanism are quite devastating. And the most incisive and damning criticisms tend not to come from devoted religious apologists (who as a group seem ill-suited to the task of hard, clinical, rational criticism), but from secular thinkers themselves.

I predict within a few years Tal will become a rabid EV. What say y'all?

Once again, evidence of Merc's chronic cannabis habit. He is, without question (and this is really saying something!) the single most obtuse participant on this message board.

[_Analytics]

Hi amigos

So far, my essay series here is looking like a total bust.

I can't even get anyone to concede that in a profound way, secular humanism is committed to intellectual "enlightenment" as crucial to increasing human happiness.

Maybe we should put this thing out of its misery...

I agree that secular humanism teaches that we ought to face the truth and that we ought to live a happy, best life. I don’t think very many humanists believe think that facing the truth guarantees happiness, which is what you seem to be getting at. Rather, the way I see it is that if you face the truth and set the goal of happiness, you are in an excellent position with your human resourcefulness to figure out what you need to do in order to be happy and then to do it.

I’ll concede that humanism entails a presumption that facing the truth doesn’t preclude being happy. Hopefully the actions that are needed in order to be happy entail no more drugs than endorphins and a semi-moderate amount of red wine every evening.

That’s what I think at least. Perhaps the Secular Humanist community should excommunicate me?

[_solomarineris]

Kind of makes you understand how people feel when 50,000 Mormon missionaries go out into the world to bear their testimonies, no? It's no good to be on the other side of that equation.

I can only hope the missionaries do not exude anger and vitriol in the same fashion as you.

LOaP,
Your characterization of Atishock (& others like him) being angry, somewhat viloent, virulent has absolutely no merit.
I see here posters like him, Mercury, Boaz&Lydia, others trying to convey the ugly truth behind LDS church.
What is wrong with that? Is it not true that 50thousand LDS missionaries disseminating lies all over the planet?
No, I am not on medication, I am not angry. You obviously find some sort of value or entertainment in discussing philosopical aspects of your religion with these guys, otherwise, you'd be on MADd board, exchanging pleasantries with good old professor.
OTOH those intellectual midgets (MADd, RFM, CARM) cannot handle the truth so they cut the posters off.

[_solomarineris]

Tal,
Please tell us what kinda elements SH pimps for profit to be qualified as a fraud?
Which SH institutions you know of sell you snake oil for profit?
Tell us how they might de-fraud us?

[_Loquacious Lurker]

These are the tenets of SH, as I'm sure you're aware:

Need to test beliefs - A conviction that dogmas, ideologies and traditions, whether religious, political or social, must be weighed and tested by each individual and not simply accepted on faith.

Reason, evidence, scientific method - A commitment to the use of critical reason, factual evidence, and scientific methods of inquiry, rather than faith and mysticism, in seeking solutions to human problems and answers to important human questions.

Fulfillment, growth, creativity - A primary concern with fulfillment, growth, and creativity for both the individual and humankind in general.

Search for truth - A constant search for objective truth, with the understanding that new knowledge and experience constantly alter our imperfect perception of it.

This life - A concern for this life and a commitment to making it meaningful through better understanding of ourselves, our history, our intellectual and artistic achievements, and the outlooks of those who differ from us.

Ethics - A search for viable individual, social and political principles of ethical conduct, judging them on their ability to enhance human well-being and individual responsibility.

Building a better world - A conviction that with reason, an open exchange of ideas, good will, and tolerance, progress can be made in building a better world for ourselves and our children.

Well, well, well...what WILL the criminal mind concoct next? Just which of these do you have a problem with? Is it the "building a better world for ourselves and our children" or the "search for viable individual, social and political principles of ethical conduct" or the "conviction that dogmas...must be weighed and tested by each individual and not simply accepted on faith" that are the stumbling block? Maybe it's the "constant search for objective truth?"

Are you seriously going to lump this framwork for living ethically into the area of fraud? If you have a better formula for living and finding happiness without resorting to Bronze Age mythologies, I would very much like to hear what that is.