| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Philosophy Forum » Humanism
Page 1 of 3 Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next
|
| Author |
Message |
| turtoni |
Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 7:24 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Humanism is a broad category of ethical philosophies that affirm the
dignity and worth of all people, based on the ability to determine
right and wrong by appeal to universal human qualities — particularly
rationality.[1][2] It is a component of a variety of more specific
philosophical systems and is incorporated into several religious
schools of thought. Humanism entails a commitment to the search for
truth and morality through human means in support of human interests.
In focusing on the capacity for self-determination, humanism rejects
the validity of transcendental justifications, such as a dependence on
belief without reason, the supernatural, or texts of allegedly divine
origin. Humanists endorse universal morality based on the commonality
of the human condition, suggesting that solutions to human social and
cultural problems cannot be parochial."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism
*HTH any nuts in alt.atheism
(*hope that helps) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ZerkonX |
Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 9:18 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 22:24:01 -0700, turtoni wrote:
Quote: humanism rejects
the validity of transcendental justifications, such as a dependence on
belief without reason, the supernatural, or texts of allegedly divine
origin.
therefore it is, as described here, another dogma feeding upon that which
it rejects. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Christopher A. Lee |
Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 9:26 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 14:18:25 +0000, ZerkonX <Z@X.net> wrote:
Quote: On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 22:24:01 -0700, turtoni wrote:
humanism rejects
the validity of transcendental justifications, such as a dependence on
belief without reason, the supernatural, or texts of allegedly divine
origin.
therefore it is, as described here, another dogma feeding upon that which
it rejects.
<plonk> yet another fucking moron. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| tooly |
Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 10:50 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"turtoni" <turtoni@fastmail.net> wrote in message
news:860c77cf-edce-48a7-8395-d63a37ca0df4@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
"Humanism is a broad category of ethical philosophies that affirm the
dignity and worth of all people, based on the ability to determine
right and wrong by appeal to universal human qualities — particularly
rationality.[1][2] It is a component of a variety of more specific
philosophical systems and is incorporated into several religious
schools of thought. Humanism entails a commitment to the search for
truth and morality through human means in support of human interests.
In focusing on the capacity for self-determination, humanism rejects
the validity of transcendental justifications, such as a dependence on
belief without reason, the supernatural, or texts of allegedly divine
origin. Humanists endorse universal morality based on the commonality
of the human condition, suggesting that solutions to human social and
cultural problems cannot be parochial."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism
Problems with Humanism. First, it gives no justification for altruistic
behavior. If we are to be rational, then we look to 'self interest'. In
that 'self interest', a great many antisocial behaviors can be justified.
To understand this, look to how top execs for a corporation 'must' think.
Corporations are 'legal entities', but have no 'moral' base, and act without
human moral code, in that ownership is spread over many individuals who need
to see profit [the only justification for reasoning]. Oh, corporations may
act nobably, but only for sake of public relations, which again is justified
on the bottom line of profit to the company. Humanism has no higher plateau
from which it can gain any moral code beyond 'selfishness'. But,
fortunately, it borrows from centuries of evolved empathetic reach that has
been developed through a reach for God.
Second, it is based upon a shallow understanding of human nature. Freud
defined an upper stage of mental reasoning called the 'super ego' that is
based upon the 'rightness' or the 'wrongness' of situations. Humanism
invalidates this part of our reasoning, leaving us at our 'egotistical'
basis at best, which is the 'rational' mode, where we 'calculate'. Thusly,
we do not steal under humanism, not because it is 'wrong', but because we
might get caught and go to jail. There is no system of law that can be
devised that will cover all aspects of human behavior 24/7, and indeed, the
only reason it works to begin with is that a population exists with some
moral platitude about right and wrong.
Third, humanism and science is totally material in scope. Materialism
reduces us to superficiality, where beauty is inspired by the 'looks' of a
person rather than their virtue for example, or how much wealth one
accumulates and not their character or even how they obtained the wealth
[drug dealers will be treated with as more respect than priests in a
materialistic society, as long they have the money to pay] etc. It leads to
decadence and prurient behaviors and gives no higher value for the bottom
teirs of the populations to strive toward. Essentially, materialism
destroys the human spirit [by it's very definition in fact].
Finally, HOPE. Humans are intelligent creatures that can extrapolate base
premise to a wide range of conclusions. Humanism has no object upon which
HOPE itself can be justified, and indeed, as science [it's basic rationale]
can only base existence upon 'survival', humanism cannot give us any other
reason to survive except that. HOPE dwindles under humanism in time,
leaving people essentially with only FEAR of death to sustain them. .
This is all just off the cuff...and of course, IMHO, which not scholarly. A
scholar would logically be able to trash humanism with much greater aplomb.
Humans mean well, but we are all selfish creatures, highly intelligent, who
can rationalize our way to just about any behavior imaginable. Without a
SELF MAINTAINED system of constraint, I'm afraid we unleash an animal
capable of much power to create 'less than redemtpive' experience to justify
the continuation of itself.
Question: How can humanism provide justification to individuals to maintain
this 'self maintained' system of constraint? We are talking about
conscience here. In private moments, where does the individual gain their
'object' of rationale that they 'serve' the human community when it means
SELF being made subservient to anything? Again, without a super ego, but
only a calculating ego with which to reason?
There's more. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Don H |
Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:33 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"turtoni" <turtoni@fastmail.net> wrote in message
news:860c77cf-edce-48a7-8395-d63a37ca0df4@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
"Humanism is a broad category of ethical philosophies that affirm the
dignity and worth of all people, based on the ability to determine
right and wrong by appeal to universal human qualities — particularly
rationality.[1][2] It is a component of a variety of more specific
philosophical systems and is incorporated into several religious
schools of thought. Humanism entails a commitment to the search for
truth and morality through human means in support of human interests.
In focusing on the capacity for self-determination, humanism rejects
the validity of transcendental justifications, such as a dependence on
belief without reason, the supernatural, or texts of allegedly divine
origin. Humanists endorse universal morality based on the commonality
of the human condition, suggesting that solutions to human social and
cultural problems cannot be parochial."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism
*HTH any nuts in alt.atheism
(*hope that helps)
# Vanity of vanities, all is vanity, and self-glorification by us Humans
adds to the sum total.
Due to the many crimes committed by the Mad Ape, as compared with our
Animal Relatives, even the tiger and the shark, I think I prefer the term -
Beastyism, or even Bestiality. Cuts out the cant and hypocrisy. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Lord Vetinari |
Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 3:45 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"turtoni" <turtoni@fastmail.net> wrote in message
news:860c77cf-edce-48a7-8395-d63a37ca0df4@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
"Humanism is a broad category of ethical philosophies that affirm the
dignity and worth of all people, based on the ability to determine
right and wrong by appeal to universal human qualities — particularly
rationality.[1][2] It is a component of a variety of more specific
philosophical systems and is incorporated into several religious
schools of thought. Humanism entails a commitment to the search for
truth and morality through human means in support of human interests.
In focusing on the capacity for self-determination, humanism rejects
the validity of transcendental justifications, such as a dependence on
belief without reason, the supernatural, or texts of allegedly divine
origin. Humanists endorse universal morality based on the commonality
of the human condition, suggesting that solutions to human social and
cultural problems cannot be parochial."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism
*HTH any nuts in alt.atheism
(*hope that helps)
*************************************
Here's a question for ya - Did you have some point and forget to put it in
the post, or are you merely practicing your copy/paste technique? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Lord Vetinari |
Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 3:47 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Thurisaz, Germanic barbarian" <MAILTOsecretary@carcosa.de> wrote in message
news:fv6fiq$c03$1@online.de...
Quote: turtoni:
*HTH any nuts in alt.atheism
(*hope that helps)
The true nutcases, sadly, will not take in your information. They "already
know" that opposition to their dogma, of whatever kind, is without
exception from saaataaan(TM).
*AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!* So, you're saying that Satan does TM?
Quote: Therefore they will "know exactly" that you
are lying to them to make them doubt their bullshit, err, faith.
But at least you can say you tried
Right on, right on, right on. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| John Jones |
Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:02 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 26 Oct 2004
Posts: 4263
|
turtoni wrote:
Quote: "Humanism is a broad category of ethical philosophies that affirm the
dignity and worth of all people, based on the ability to determine
right and wrong by appeal to universal human qualities — particularly
rationality.[1][2] It is a component of a variety of more specific
philosophical systems and is incorporated into several religious
schools of thought. Humanism entails a commitment to the search for
truth and morality through human means in support of human interests.
In focusing on the capacity for self-determination, humanism rejects
the validity of transcendental justifications, such as a dependence on
belief without reason, the supernatural, or texts of allegedly divine
origin. Humanists endorse universal morality based on the commonality
of the human condition, suggesting that solutions to human social and
cultural problems cannot be parochial."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism
*HTH any nuts in alt.atheism
(*hope that helps)
Humanists are hardened westernised materialists seeking to promote a
friendly image of themselves and their physicalist creed by presenting
themselves as harmless quasi-New-Agers.
Their knowledge of the realms of human experience is based on the
stunted models of illness, and their ethnocentric rejection of
non-westernised communities is sickening. Humanist's are like the racist
National Front - they claim the flag is their own. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Lord Vetinari |
Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:20 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"ZerkonX" <Z@X.net> wrote in message news:pan.2008.04.29.14.18.52@X.net...
Quote: On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 22:24:01 -0700, turtoni wrote:
humanism rejects
the validity of transcendental justifications, such as a dependence on
belief without reason, the supernatural, or texts of allegedly divine
origin.
therefore it is, as described here, another dogma feeding upon that which
it rejects.
You're full of crap, cretin. We know better than you, ignorant one. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| turtoni |
Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 6:36 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Apr 29, 11:50 am, "tooly" <rd...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
Quote: "turtoni" <turt...@fastmail.net> wrote in message
news:860c77cf-edce-48a7-8395-d63a37ca0df4@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
"Humanism is a broad category of ethical philosophies that affirm the
dignity and worth of all people, based on the ability to determine
right and wrong by appeal to universal human qualities — particularly
rationality.[1][2] It is a component of a variety of more specific
philosophical systems and is incorporated into several religious
schools of thought. Humanism entails a commitment to the search for
truth and morality through human means in support of human interests.
In focusing on the capacity for self-determination, humanism rejects
the validity of transcendental justifications, such as a dependence on
belief without reason, the supernatural, or texts of allegedly divine
origin. Humanists endorse universal morality based on the commonality
of the human condition, suggesting that solutions to human social and
cultural problems cannot be parochial."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism
Problems with Humanism. First, it gives no justification for altruistic
behavior. If we are to be rational, then we look to 'self interest'. In
that 'self interest', a great many antisocial behaviors can be justified.
To understand this, look to how top execs for a corporation 'must' think.
Corporations are 'legal entities', but have no 'moral' base, and act without
human moral code, in that ownership is spread over many individuals who need
to see profit [the only justification for reasoning]. Oh, corporations may
act nobably, but only for sake of public relations, which again is justified
on the bottom line of profit to the company. Humanism has no higher plateau
from which it can gain any moral code beyond 'selfishness'. But,
fortunately, it borrows from centuries of evolved empathetic reach that has
been developed through a reach for God.
Second, it is based upon a shallow understanding of human nature. Freud
defined an upper stage of mental reasoning called the 'super ego' that is
based upon the 'rightness' or the 'wrongness' of situations. Humanism
invalidates this part of our reasoning, leaving us at our 'egotistical'
basis at best, which is the 'rational' mode, where we 'calculate'. Thusly,
we do not steal under humanism, not because it is 'wrong', but because we
might get caught and go to jail. There is no system of law that can be
devised that will cover all aspects of human behavior 24/7, and indeed, the
only reason it works to begin with is that a population exists with some
moral platitude about right and wrong.
Third, humanism and science is totally material in scope. Materialism
reduces us to superficiality, where beauty is inspired by the 'looks' of a
person rather than their virtue for example, or how much wealth one
accumulates and not their character or even how they obtained the wealth
[drug dealers will be treated with as more respect than priests in a
materialistic society, as long they have the money to pay] etc. It leads to
decadence and prurient behaviors and gives no higher value for the bottom
teirs of the populations to strive toward. Essentially, materialism
destroys the human spirit [by it's very definition in fact].
Finally, HOPE. Humans are intelligent creatures that can extrapolate base
premise to a wide range of conclusions. Humanism has no object upon which
HOPE itself can be justified, and indeed, as science [it's basic rationale]
can only base existence upon 'survival', humanism cannot give us any other
reason to survive except that. HOPE dwindles under humanism in time,
leaving people essentially with only FEAR of death to sustain them. .
This is all just off the cuff...and of course, IMHO, which not scholarly. A
scholar would logically be able to trash humanism with much greater aplomb..
Humans mean well, but we are all selfish creatures, highly intelligent, who
can rationalize our way to just about any behavior imaginable. Without a
SELF MAINTAINED system of constraint, I'm afraid we unleash an animal
capable of much power to create 'less than redemtpive' experience to justify
the continuation of itself.
Question: How can humanism provide justification to individuals to maintain
this 'self maintained' system of constraint? We are talking about
conscience here. In private moments, where does the individual gain their
'object' of rationale that they 'serve' the human community when it means
SELF being made subservient to anything? Again, without a super ego, but
only a calculating ego with which to reason?
There's more.
Then move to Iran or something?
"Humanism" and "Science" are merely terms for things already in
motion.
You're too late tooly. We have to deal with the future not the past.
You can build the walls as high as you like but they will be climbed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_hYs1jBy8Y
HTH. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| turtoni |
Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 7:11 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Apr 29, 2:17 am, "Thurisaz, Germanic barbarian"
<MAILTOsecret...@carcosa.de> wrote:
Quote: turtoni:
*HTH any nuts in alt.atheism
(*hope that helps)
The true nutcases, sadly, will not take in your information. They "already
know" that opposition to their dogma, of whatever kind, is without
exception from saaataaan(TM). Therefore they will "know exactly" that you
are lying to them to make them doubt their bullshit, err, faith.
But at least you can say you tried
Aye. i really imagine like others that we're all a bunch of nuts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qdb4NyHdFfE
Quote: --
"To his friend a man a friend shall prove, and gifts with gifts requite;
But men shall mocking with mockery answer, and fraud with falsehood meet."
(The Poetic Edda)
Must have been written with fundies in mind...
My personal judgment of monotheism:http://www.carcosa.de/nojebus |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| turtoni |
Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 7:13 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Apr 29, 10:18 am, ZerkonX <Z...@X.net> wrote:
Quote: On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 22:24:01 -0700, turtoni wrote:
humanism rejects
the validity of transcendental justifications, such as a dependence on
belief without reason, the supernatural, or texts of allegedly divine
origin.
therefore it is, as described here, another dogma feeding upon that which
it rejects.
"Humanism clearly rejects deference to supernatural beliefs in
resolving human affairs but not necessarily the beliefs themselves;
indeed some strains of Humanism are compatible with some religions. It
is generally compatible with atheism and agnosticism but doesn't
require either of these. The word "ignostic" (American) or
"indifferentist" (British, including OED) are sometimes applied to
Humanism, on the grounds that Humanism is an ethical process, not a
dogma about the existence or otherwise of gods; Humanists simply have
no need to be concerned with such questions. Agnosticism or atheism on
their own do not necessarily entail Humanism; many different and
sometimes incompatible philosophies happen to be atheistic in nature.
There is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists
adhere, and not all are humanistic.[4][5]
As Humanism encompasses intellectual currents running through a wide
variety of philosophical and religious thought, several strains of
Humanism allow it to fulfill, supplement or supplant the role of
religions, and in particular, to be embraced as a complete life
stance. For more on this, see Humanism (life stance). In a number of
countries, for the purpose of laws that give rights to "religions",
the secular life stance has become legally recognized as equivalent to
a "religion" for this purpose.[6] In the United States, the Supreme
Court recognized that Humanism is equivalent to a religion in the
limited sense of authorizing Humanists to conduct ceremonies commonly
carried out by officers of religious bodies. The relevant passage is
in a footnote to Torcaso v. Watkins (1961). It is often alleged by
fundamentalist critics of Humanism that the Supreme Court "declared
Humanism to be a religion," however the Court's statement, a mere
footnote at most, clearly does not in fact do so; it simply asserts an
equivalency of Humanists' right to act in ways usual to a religion,
such as ceremonial recognition of life's landmarks.
Renaissance humanism, and its emphasis on returning to the sources,
contributed to the Protestant reformation by helping to gain what
Protestants believe was a more accurate translation of Biblical texts." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| turtoni |
Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 7:14 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Apr 29, 3:33 pm, "Don H" <donlhumphr...@bigpond.com> wrote:
Quote: "turtoni" <turt...@fastmail.net> wrote in message
news:860c77cf-edce-48a7-8395-d63a37ca0df4@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
"Humanism is a broad category of ethical philosophies that affirm the
dignity and worth of all people, based on the ability to determine
right and wrong by appeal to universal human qualities — particularly
rationality.[1][2] It is a component of a variety of more specific
philosophical systems and is incorporated into several religious
schools of thought. Humanism entails a commitment to the search for
truth and morality through human means in support of human interests.
In focusing on the capacity for self-determination, humanism rejects
the validity of transcendental justifications, such as a dependence on
belief without reason, the supernatural, or texts of allegedly divine
origin. Humanists endorse universal morality based on the commonality
of the human condition, suggesting that solutions to human social and
cultural problems cannot be parochial."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism
*HTH any nuts in alt.atheism
(*hope that helps)
# Vanity of vanities, all is vanity, and self-glorification by us Humans
adds to the sum total.
Due to the many crimes committed by the Mad Ape, as compared with our
Animal Relatives, even the tiger and the shark, I think I prefer the term -
Beastyism, or even Bestiality. Cuts out the cant and hypocrisy.
"Some have interpreted Humanism to be a form of speciesism, regarding
humans as being more important than other species. The philosopher
Peter Singer, himself a Humanist, stated that "despite many individual
exceptions, Humanists have, on the whole, been unable to free
themselves from one of the most central... Christian dogmas: the
prejudice of speciesism".[8] He called on Humanists to "take a stand
against... ruthless exploitation of other sentient beings", and took
issue with statements in the Humanist Manifesto II, which he felt gave
"precedence to the interests of members of our own species."[8] He
also noted, however, that the same Manifesto stated that humans have
"no God-given or inherent right to subdue other animals", and
acknowledged that "the organizations that have done the most for
animals have been independent of religion." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| turtoni |
Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 7:16 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Apr 29, 4:45 pm, "Lord Vetinari" <vetin...@ameritech.net> wrote:
Quote: "turtoni" <turt...@fastmail.net> wrote in message
news:860c77cf-edce-48a7-8395-d63a37ca0df4@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
"Humanism is a broad category of ethical philosophies that affirm the
dignity and worth of all people, based on the ability to determine
right and wrong by appeal to universal human qualities — particularly
rationality.[1][2] It is a component of a variety of more specific
philosophical systems and is incorporated into several religious
schools of thought. Humanism entails a commitment to the search for
truth and morality through human means in support of human interests.
In focusing on the capacity for self-determination, humanism rejects
the validity of transcendental justifications, such as a dependence on
belief without reason, the supernatural, or texts of allegedly divine
origin. Humanists endorse universal morality based on the commonality
of the human condition, suggesting that solutions to human social and
cultural problems cannot be parochial."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism
*HTH any nuts in alt.atheism
(*hope that helps)
*************************************
Here's a question for ya - Did you have some point and forget to put it in
the post, or are you merely practicing your copy/paste technique?
and your point? exercise your plonker or just don't read it if it
doesn't interest you?
i wont cry.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQhh4Xs8RcM |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ZerkonX |
Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 7:43 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 10:26:00 -0400, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
Quote: plonk> yet another fucking moron.
On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 16:20:43 -0500, Lord Vetinari wrote:
Quote: You're full of crap, cretin. We know better than you, ignorant one.
!!! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Page 1 of 3 Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Thu Jul 24, 2008 5:49 pm
|
|