[MD] Modern American Humanism and MOQ

[Ham Priday]

Mark and All -- 


I've been wondering what prompted all this fuss about Humanism, and figure 
it must mean that the folks here are of the opinion that the MoQ is a 
humanist philosophy.

Regarding the Manifesto, Craig said: "I think all the points are right on." 
Well, that depends on where your priorities are.  If you are a logical 
positivist, a naturalist, or a utilitarian, the points fit you like a glove. 
If you are a philosopher, theist, or an artist, however, they reject the 
very heart of your reality.  My own attitude toward humanism is ambivalent. 
I endorse the idea that humankind is unique in this world, and that science 
is the best method for solving its problems.  On the other hand, I abhor the 
the blind submission to evolutionary theory and outright rejection of 
spirituality.  Like Platt, I'm also skeptical of the collectivist (Marxist?) 
implications in the last plank which states: "We seek to minimize the 
inequities of circumstance and ability, and we support a just distribution 
of nature's resources and the fruits of human effort."

In the event that some of you don't have a handle on this philosophy and the 
belief system it fosters -- frankly, I didn't -- the following is a digest 
of two days of research on the Internet.

Cultural Humanism started in the 18th and early 19th centuries as a 
grass-roots movement promoting human betterment and the dissemination of 
knowledge.  Following the French Revolution, Rousseau's idea that virtue 
could be created by human reason alone was vigorously attacked by religious 
and political conservatives. Edmund Burke and Joseph de Maistre, among 
others, condemned it as the "deification of man," and the ecclesiastical 
establishment opposed the political and social reforms that it foreshadowed. 
One liberal reformer of the time, Ernest Renan in 'The Future of Knowledge: 
Thoughts on 1848', wrote: "It is my deep conviction that pure humanism will 
be the religion of the future, that is, the cult of all that pertains to 
man — all of life, sanctified and raised to the level of a moral value".  In 
Germany, the "Left Hegelians" Arnold Ruge and Karl Marx were developing 
humanism as a "progressive" philosophy centered around mankind (as opposed 
to institutionalized religion) in an evolutionary universe.

Modern Secular Humanism actually had its roots in the Renaissance, and 
focused on the split between reason and religion.  It challenged the 
church's authority in two vital areas: Galileo's support of the Copernican 
revolution in science, and Roman Catholic adherence to Jerome's Vulgate in 
opposition to the theories of Aristotle in religion.  In theology, the Dutch 
scholar Erasmus with his new Greek text showed that scriptural translations 
were frequently in error, driving a wedge between "reason" and "authority", 
as they were then understood.

The humanists have been interested in public education for nearly a century. 
John Dewey, a principal founder of America's educational system, was one of 
the chief signers of the 1933 Humanist Manifesto, and the humanists have 
been eminently successful in teaching children that God is imaginary and 
contrary to 'science'.  Secular Humanism is Evolutionary Theory, and to 
satisfy the fundamental question "Where did we come from?" children are 
taught the doctrine of Evolution.  Creation Science has been excluded from 
the public school curriculum by the ACLU and other liberal-progressive 
organizations on the grounds that Creation is religious, and the government 
should not support religion in any fashion.

I found this ideological profile of the humanist in the website of 
atheism.about.com, and I think it succinctly summarizes the worldview we are 
talking about:

"Humanists don’t have what would be considered a typical metaphysical 
outlook because humanists don’t normally accept the existence of anything 
which isn’t a part of nature (or, if they do, they don’t believe that it is 
‘more real’ than our own existence).  Humanists are essentially naturalists, 
explaining the nature of reality in naturalistic and materialistic terms."

As I said above, whether you are a humanist or not "depends on where your 
priorities are".  If the show fits . . .

Essentially spreaking,
Ham