Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here's a definition of humanism according to the British Humanist Association: Humanists:
Think for themselves about what is right and wrong, based on reason and respect for others. Find meaning, beauty and joy in the one life we have, without the need for an afterlife.
Look to science instead of religion as the best way to discover and understand the world.
Believe people can use empathy and compassion to make the world a better place for everyone.
Here's a definition of humanism according to the British Humanist Association: Humanists: Think for themselves about what is right and wrong, based on reason and respect for others. Find meaning, beauty and joy in the one life we have, without the need for an afterlife. Look to science instead of religion as the best way to discover and understand the world. Believe people can use empathy and compassion to make the world a better place for everyone.
I would qualify as humanist, but I suspect that logic may force us to conclude that some qualitative aspects of reality are fundamental. If this is true, then we will need to adjust our traditional concepts of reductive materialism. It's a long story, but basically I've come to the conclusion (after two decades of study) that we will probably never be able to show how qualia (the qualitative/phenomenal aspect of experience, or "what it's like" to experience something like the taste of sugar, etc.) emerge from the seemingly non-qualitative (purely objective and/or abstract) particles, forces, and principles of physics. Complex behaviors (e.g., patterns of neural activity, muscle contractions, etc. associated with saying "I love the taste of honey") seemingly could, in principle, be explained by physics, but the sensory feel of the subjective experience that presumably might cause someone to express his or her love of honey cannot be explained in the purely objective terms of science. This leaves us with the odd notion that somehow some qualitative aspects of the the taste of honey are fundamental to reality, which is to say, they don't emerge from the purely objective particles, forces, and principles of physics.
Frankly, when I talk about this, many atheists/humanists say that I'm being mystical. I totally accept this. I am a mystic. I am "spiritual." I am a mystical/spiritual atheist. Since I'm basing my conclusions on logical investigations of science and philosophy, rather than religion, I'd say that I'm just as much an atheist/humanist as any other atheist/humanist, despite my seemingly mystical conclusions.
Bottom line: I just want to point out that atheism/humanism does not necessarily imply non-mystical or non-spiritual. An atheist does not have to be a philosophical materialist. An atheist does not have to believe that science can explain everything in purely objective terms. An atheist does not even have to reject the notion that there could be some sort of afterlife. To be an atheist, or a humanist, one simply has to reject the temptation to explain anything in terms of God, or other traditional religious mythologies. At least that's how it seems to me.
Given that I am wary of putting my name to anything ending 'ist' (apart from atheist because it has no small print clauses - just 'no god - belief'...pace the hostile theist -used definitions found in dictionaries) I am probably pretty darn humanist since the idea implies reliance on human values, codes and social decisions and that is what you get if you place no reliance on the ones derived from religion.
And now, the test.
.........
......Uh huh.....
........"We calculate you are 100% humanist. Wow, you are a definitely a humanist. Many people are, often without even knowing it!
Share your results on: Facebook or Twitter"
I'm 86% humanist - Identify with the "Angel of balance" - My "number 2" personality is very rare - and I'm an extremely moderate Libertarian. ... according to internet quizzes I happen to agree with.
I'm pretty sure all atheists are humanists. I'd love to see or hear an example of one who isn't. Except the ole' Hitler one. lol
Hitler wasn't an atheist. He was a Christian.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
... according to internet quizzes I happen to agree with.
