ForumGarden

Those who are attracted to a positive, progressive philosophy, unencumbered by the rigidity of traditional religions, embrace the vibrant lifestance of humanism, the radical idea that you can be good without a god. The Humanist Society bolsters humanism's rational philosophy by focusing on community and daily living.



https://humanism.org.uk/

One of the absolute problems of discussing topics like this is the underlying difference in meaning which people place on words. In this case, unsurprisingly, it would be "god".

Perhaps you could give us a concise complete definition of what the word means to you, so that we can either tweak it or adopt it for the discussion.

Traditionally a god was anything one worshipped ,in the hope of reward and redemption.

Mother earth, the moon, the sky ,a tree, a totem and eventually gods incarnate and invisible to the masses.

A god could see one through harsh winters, save ones crops from failure etc.

As we can see with the ancient Egyptians, the great fear of death and it's finality was a great motivator in creating gods to reassure them of an after-life.

Many people still crave this and so turn to one of the many world religions for they all offer it as a major reason for their cults existence. The vast majority pay lips service and would put on a census; Catholic (eg) because it was the traditional religion (sect) of their forefathers.

As far as morality is concerned, we have daily proof that 'godliness' does not create goodness , no more than godlessness rejects it.

Everything you've included there defines a god, it seems to me, as a human creation with no independent existence or power. If that's so then you can see the importance of defining terms. Most, though not all, religious adherents would disagree and say that one major aspect of god is an existence and power independent of people. They'd use words like pre-existing, eternal, omnipotent, omnipresent and good. But then, one might expect them to.

The problem is that if you restrict your definition to something so alien to believers, you're scarcely going to find any meaningful overlap of ideas in a conversation with them.

Maybe we could have several words to focus on a specific meaning of god, to allow precision?

Are you cherry-picking, Tyr? All that I have mentioned are gods. Some people in the UK still worship trees.

If there is ONLY one god, then all worshippers are heathens!

You've commendably noted one of the main evils of monotheism. I bring to your attention, however, that there are a billion or so fervent bigoted practicing Christians and a billion or so fervent bigoted practicing Muslims across the planet, not to mention the odd Jew. Are we to discount them when it comes to evaluating godliness?

Since they cannot all be right some of them/all of them must be worshipping a false god.

Arena;1439137 wrote: Since they cannot all be right some of them/all of them must be worshipping a false god.That's no different from your own initial humanist position that all external gods are false gods, presumably.

In terms of discussing matters with any monotheistic believer then of course their starting point is that every monotheist outside of their own given dogmatic system is worshiping a false god. It doesn't dent their personal conviction that their own god is real, omnipotent, good &c &c, and this position will be true of all those monotheists.

I am, I take it, correct in thinking you reject the possibility of their being any such thing as a god with an independent existence?

And that you accept there are real things which people choose to worship, either explicit idols, or generalized notions like Nature, or glades where people retreat to pray because they think of them as holy places?

I'm aiming us toward a definition where we both accept, for the thread, that believing people imbue these things, just as they imbue their irrational and unfounded notion of an "independent god", with the capacity to change the behavior of the believer. Your humanist position is that they need not do this, but do you accept that this is what they actually do?

I treat all religion as I do the Friday 13th/walking under ladders type myths. Purely as myths

But these believers don't, and what they believe does influence their behavior.

Arena;1439122 wrote: Those who are attracted to a positive, progressive philosophy, unencumbered by the rigidity of traditional religions, embrace the vibrant lifestance of humanism, the radical idea that you can be good without a god. The Humanist Society bolsters humanism's rational philosophy by focusing on community and daily living


In other words,



NON IMPEDITI RATIONE COGITATIONIS

· English: UNENCUMBERED BY THE THOUGHT PROCESS

OK, I'll play along.

Where is the "Humanist" rule book that all your ascribe to? Can we have a peek to what you evangelize?

tude dog;1439176 wrote: OK, I'll play along.

Where is the "Humanist" rule book that all your ascribe to? Can we have a peek to what you evangelize?


You missed the link in the opening post.

tude dog;1439176 wrote: In other words,



NON IMPEDITI RATIONE COGITATIONIS

· English: UNENCUMBERED BY THE THOUGHT PROCESS

OK, I'll play along.




That's your old motto. Still waiting on an explanation as to what feral actually means.

Hi Anne......it's from the Latin for 'wild beast, as in ferocious

Hi Arena:

Thanks, I already know the meaning. I'm asking Tude to explain what His meaning is. I mean, he knows what I mean. A symbolic synonym for.................

Sorry, Anne!

Arena;1439251 wrote: Sorry, Anne!


Ohhhhh, don't be sorry, thanks for trying to help!

AnneBoleyn;1439244 wrote: Hi Arena:

Thanks, I already know the meaning. I'm asking Tude to explain what His meaning is. I mean, he knows what I mean. A symbolic synonym for.................


Golly, wish you'd leave me alone on that.

You may remember I did not come up with that but copied it. I did a short search, but didn't find the original where I found it.

Want an example?

I didn't post this, but you asked for it.

EBT benefit card glitch sparks Walmart shopping sprees in Louisiana

The Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) system allows recipients of government food stamps to purchase goods using a digital card with a set spending limit, but for a few hours over the weekend, that limit disappeared for many users visiting Walmart stores in Louisiana.

Walmart and local police in Springhill and Mansfield confirmed to CBS affiliate KSLA that officers were called into the stores to help maintain order Saturday as shoppers swept through the aisles at two stores and bought as much as they could carry.



Welcome to our cradle to grave welfare state.

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 wonder how that understanding of self goes down in really poor countries. It sounds like a very middle class view to me.

TD: "Golly, wish you'd leave me alone on that."

Nope. Not until you answer. & I see it's catching on, there's a real angry guy on my local blog website who uses it quite a bit. I get on him too.

But Not with Love :-4

eta--"Welcome to our cradle to grave welfare state."

Star Trek Universe! At Last! Everyone gets everything using Replicators. Sounds Great!

fuzzywuzzy;1439295 wrote: I wonder how that understanding of self goes down in really poor countries. It sounds like a very middle class view to me.


I agree. You must have your basic comforts met before you can enjoy your humanity.

eta--I'm not positive on that. Perhaps I'm wrong.

I just think telling someone to have empathy and compassion when they havent eaten in 15 days is a bit over the top ....but then again..... there is the clause that people do what they think is right . So I'm thinking that the starving person rob the other of their goods so they can learn a lessen about empathy and compassion.