Flawed Humanism Research Paper

The topic of this paper is Flawed Humanism. The purpose of this paper will emphasize the reality of flawed humanism. This paper will also show that humanism offers no solution at all to mankind’s desperate condition and that Christianity really does provide a superior belief system. The disjointedness of contemporary humanism is typically credited to its free thought causes. Not really. Contemporary humanism is a wreck since it doesn’t realize what it trusts, to such an extent that it doesn’t comprehend what “it” remains for.

Humanism has turned into the jumbled message of opportunity, science, law based values, and church-state division spread out over a playing field with no ball and no principles. Therefore, I am writing about Secular Humanism. Summary of the Worldview Humanity is what is most important in this worldview. To the secularist, we are nothing more than an advanced animal, or a bunch of cells and atoms. There is no spot in the Humanist perspective for either interminability or God in the legitimate implications of those terms.

Humanism fights that rather than the divine beings making the universe, the universe, in the individualized type of people offering rein to their creative energy, made the divine beings. Their source of ultimate authority is science and the empirical use of reason. People may, and do, make up their own particular tenets. All current moralities and every current law are human curios, results of human culture, social traditions. The physical universe is all that exists and that science is our lone wellspring of learning blocks, which precludes the presence of information about anything heavenly.

Science is the definitive source of knowledge (truth). Naturalists, whose epistemology is grounded in science, discover truth in what they can see with their eyes—that is, just the physical universe. Naturalism says that exclusive matter exists – things you can touch, feel, and study. The Humanist trusts the logical technique as the main beyond any doubt method for knowing anything, so if something can’t be watched, tried, and probed, it doesn’t exist. Since you can’t watch God, hell-fire, the human personality or soul, or behavior investigates them they can’t – and don’t – exist.

Evaluation of the Worldview On the off chance that humanism was right in proclaiming that man is destined to be cheerful and happy, he would not be destined to pass on or die. Since his body is destined to pass on or die, his errand on earth obviously should be of a more otherworldly or spiritual nature. The regions researched by humanism, for example, awareness and feeling are extremely hard to scientifically think about or study. The result of such experimental constraints implies that there is an absence of observational proof to bolster the key speculations of the methodology.

Although the use of the term “religious” was meant to stress experiences and activities which are humanly significant, while excluding any supernatural beliefs and explanations of reality, some religious humanist leaders and participants objected to any uses of religion. Thus, in an effort to emphasize its secular dimension, the authors of the Humanist Manifesto 11 (1973) removed any reference to religious humanism. It is indeed factual that the Secular Worldview rejects the presence of God, individuals get the opportunity to settle on models and values.

Humanists trust that science, reason, and recorded experience are adequate aides for making sense of what is correct or wrong in any circumstance. These models won’t generally be the same, as every individual has an alternate foundation and thinking. Thusly, the gauges and values – morals – are relative. The Humanist Manifesto Il states, “We affirm that moral values derive their source from human experience. Ethics is autonomous and situational, needing not theological or ideological sanction. Ethics stems from human need and interest.

For further insight upon this worldview, committed humanists also often reflect on and sometimes even worry about what religion is. Humanists wonder about whether what they do is really humanistic. Christian Alternative Absolute morality exists; there are moral commands that are universal in scope and do not vary from person to person. For absolute moral commands to have real moral force, there must be a moral lawgiver. The possibility that faith in God is a crutch starts with the presumption that God doesn’t exist and is a human development.

Moral absolutism is the main rationality of mainstream morals that shows that a few activities have moral worth all by themselves, totally autonomous of circumstances, goal, and outcomes. It is mankind’s obligation to find the all-inclusive truths included and create laws that urge individuals to act ethically. In any case, logicians don’t concur with respect to how we are to uncover these truths. All in all, there are three potential outcomes. No reason is offered for this; it is only a suspicion framing a false conclusion from an unwarranted reason.

The contention from wish-satisfaction cuts both ways and is similarly substantial when connected to the explanations behind unbelief, which implies that it neglects to meet the gauges of a sensible contention for dismissing God. Can science and reason be used to develop ethical judgments? Many theists claim that without religious foundations, “anything goes,” and social chaos will ensue. Scientific naturalists believe that secular societies already have developed responsible ethical norms and that science and reason have helped us to solve moral dilemmas.

How and in what sense this occurs are vital issues that need to be discussed in contemporary society, for this may very well be the hottest issue of the twenty-first century. Our reality is quickly changing, and its general thought, which today stands restricted to all conventional belief systems, is modem humanism. Defense of Christianity As per the consistent issue of the logical problem of evil, it is coherently incomprehensible for God and evil to coincide. On the off chance that God exists, then evil cannot exist.

On the off chance that evil exists, then God can’t exist. Since evil exists, it takes after that God does not exist. However, the issue with this conflict is that there’s no inspiration to gather that God and malice are reliably incongruent. There’s no express contradiction between them. Be that as it may, if the skeptic means there’s some certain inconsistency amongst God and detestable, then he should expect some shrouded premises which draw out this understood disagreement. Be that as it may, the issue is that no savant has ever possessed the to recognize such premises.

In this manner, the sensible issue of abhorrence neglects to demonstrate any irregularity amongst God and evil. Since the New Testament gives the key recorded source to information on the restoration, various pundits in the midst of the nineteenth century struck the resolute nature of these scriptural files. Prior to the end of the nineteenth century, in any case, archeological disclosures had certified the accuracy of the New Testament unique duplicates. Disclosures of early papyri traversed any boundary between the period of Christ and existing unique duplicates from a later date.

Therefore, it can be certain that the events of Jesus’ resurrection were indeed factual. Jerusalem, March 31, 2013. Following two years of escalated study, a gathering comprising of almost one thousand driving history specialists, archeologists, and bio-scientific experts have inferred that a late reserve of archives and ancient rarities discovered covered close to the Dome of the Rock demonstrate indisputably that a Jewish prophet named Jesus was executed by the Romans and rose from the dead. The DNA samples simply cannot be refuted,” said Nobel laureate Ronald Q. Symonson. “The evidence is overwhelming. Somehow this first-century Jew who was crucified by the Romans died and came back to life after several days. ” Dworkin looks for a union between a religious existence with God and a religious existence without God. This includes his contention that the presence (or non-presence) of God is of auxiliary significance to what his religions without God offer.

Dworkin’s description of the role of god or gods or God (Dworkin uses all three terms, written in lower and upper case) is hardly flattering: “Of course, gods have served many human purposes: they have promised an afterlife, explained storms, and taken sides against enemies” There are not many theists who would see God as important only because of an afterlife, meteorology, and military campaigns (as should be evident in the modest preface above).

We will consider more on what the existence of God might mean in the second section of this paper. For now, it is important to appreciate Dworkin’s claim that the primary affirmation of objective values is deeper than questions about the truth or falsehood of theism. Conclusion The secular humanist assesses everything from the point of view of what is seen or what can be known by the faculties.

In this manner, a conviction for the mainstream humanist is delivered not just by what can be experienced through the faculties additionally by that which is tried utilizing exploratory strategy. Contemporary humanism is a disaster area since it doesn’t understand what it trusts, to such a degree, to the point that it doesn’t grasp what “it” stays for. Humanism has transformed into the scrambled message of chance, science, law based values, and church-state division spread out over a playing field with no ball and no standards.