Freethought & Rationalism Archive

pariah · 06-07-2003, 09:31 PM

I am taking this from the british humanist site

humanism.org.uk or something i dunno...i dont think i will be grilled for sources anyway ;]

Quote:

Who can I trust?

"It is not so much our friends' help that we value,
as the confident knowledge that they will help us."
Epicurus Fragments, c300 BCE

Humanists like to think for themselves, but this doesn't mean they can't trust anyone. They don't trust traditional authorities simply because they are authorities, or gods for whom there is no evidence. They do trust those human beings who respect evidence and the truth, and, of course, we all trust in other people who have earned our trust - our friends and relations who we can rely on to help us. Most people actually are quite trustworthy - we go about our lives amongst other people every day and it is really quite rare to be a victim of violence or hatred or abuse - because sensible people realise that a good life is best based on mutual respect. Humanists also think that we have to trust ourselves and other human beings to sort out problems, large or small, because there is no god out there to do it for us.

doesnt seem like you did anything antihumanist to me...i found this article a much better explanation of why someone isnt humanist

http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/humanist.htm

Rousseau_CHN · 06-08-2003, 05:47 PM

Salut Sabine

(reply? nah, not in the mood, just wanted to say that for some time now)

Shake · 06-10-2003, 12:13 PM

I find myself agreeing with much of what has been said in this thread. Blind faith is not the answer in any philosophy.

IMHO, atheism is not a 'negative philosophy,' but has gotten that connotation falsely. I'd say it's more neutral than negative, even though it can be seen as a negative assertion. But since I define atheism as a lack of belief in the supernatural, it's like a zero, not a negative.

pariah, I cannot let this:

Quote:

The cult of Man with a capital M is only a slight improvement on the cult of God. It still leaves a lot to be desired, women for instance.

from your link go unchecked. It may be a nitpick, but damnit, I feel it's important. The humanists would tell you that if you're going to use capital M for Man, then it stands for mankind (which includes women, and even children), not just the male of the species. Maybe they should instead use the word Human instead of Man. There, is that better?

I also don't see where he really offers a better alternative. I get his point though, and actually don't totally disagree.

Biff the unclean · 06-10-2003, 01:20 PM

Biff, that's a BOLO tie.
Thank you, but you should be ashamed of yourself for knowing enough about them to actually know the correct spelling.

One thing Isaac claimed was that he was the one who first suggested Scientology to L Ron Hubbard as a joke because Hubbard wasn't a good enough SF writer to make a living at it.
I don't know if it's true or not, but it's what he claimed. And it's nasty enough to be true to his character.
He was an Atheist and a Humanist but he did "not suffer fools gladly and think himself wise."

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-08-2003, 05:47 PM	#12
Rousseau_CHN Banned Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Nowhere Land Posts: 441	Salut Sabine (reply? nah, not in the mood, just wanted to say that for some time now)

06-10-2003, 01:20 PM	#14
Biff the unclean Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: an inaccessible island fortress Posts: 10,638	Biff, that's a BOLO tie. Thank you, but you should be ashamed of yourself for knowing enough about them to actually know the correct spelling. One thing Isaac claimed was that he was the one who first suggested Scientology to L Ron Hubbard as a joke because Hubbard wasn't a good enough SF writer to make a living at it. I don't know if it's true or not, but it's what he claimed. And it's nasty enough to be true to his character. He was an Atheist and a Humanist but he did "not suffer fools gladly and think himself wise."

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.