• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Calling Out All Atheists

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
is compassion, love necessary for humanism? is a healthy mind, a healthy spirit, necessary to a healthy body, a social status?


i'm an atheist. i believe and trust in the law of reciprocity and that love is a necessary, healthy, and curative thing
 
Last edited:

John53

I go leaps and bounds
Premium Member
is compassion, love necessary for humanism? is a healthy mind, a healthy spirit, necessary to a healthy body, a social status?


i'm an atheist. i believe and trust in the law of reciprocity and that love is a necessary, healthy, and curative thing

I don't really understand the question but even though I'm an atheist I try and follow the 2nd greatest Christian commandment and that is to treat others how I would like to be treated. Sometimes it's not that easy.
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
I don't really understand the question but even though I'm an atheist I try and follow the 2nd greatest Christian commandment and that is to treat others how I would like to be treated. Sometimes it's not that easy.
there are christian atheists. but isn't the overall gist for humanity to love and be loved? if a humanist isn't love and respect for our fellow man, neighbor a necessity. or have you ever thought of love as a basic human need in your belief system.
 

John53

I go leaps and bounds
Premium Member
there are christian atheists. but isn't the overall gist for humanity to love and be loved? if a humanist isn't love and respect for our fellow man, neighbor a necessity. or have you ever thought of love as a basic human need in your belief system.

It's part of it but as a massive introvert not the most important part for me.
 

Laika

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
is compassion, love necessary for humanism? is a healthy mind, a healthy spirit, necessary to a healthy body, a social status?


i'm an atheist. i believe and trust in the law of reciprocity and that love is a necessary, healthy, and curative thing

“Love thy neighbour” is part of the cultural influence Christianity has on people, even in a secular society. Being someone who is generally nice to people (probably too nice), the bigger concern was learning more healthy ways to deal with negative emotions or emotions that are more taboo. E.g. Hatred, anger, lust, jealousy, greed, etc. Partly because of christianity and partly because these emotions are considered anti-social, I’m having to rethink my feelings on them and find a level of radical honesty and acceptance for them as well.

At some level you have to respect yourself enough to have these feelings without the sense it is “sinful” or socially unacceptable to do so. Hiding these feelings doesn’t mean they are not there and Christianity tries to police our inner most thoughts in a way we shouldn’t accept. Otherwise, all we do is lie about them, to ourselves and others. I would argue that genuine moral and spiritual growth requires self-knowledge, including of the darker parts of our personality we are less comfortable with.
 

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
“Love thy neighbour” is part of the cultural influence Christianity has on people, even in a secular society. Being someone who is generally nice to people (probably too nice), the bigger concern was learning more healthy ways to deal with negative emotions or emotions that are more taboo. E.g. Hatred, anger, lust, jealousy, greed, etc. Partly because of christianity and partly because these emotions are considered anti-social, I’m having to rethink my feelings on them and find a level of radical honesty and acceptance for them as well.

At some level you have to respect yourself enough to have these feelings without the sense it is “sinful” or socially unacceptable to do so. Hiding these feelings doesn’t mean they are not there and Christianity tries to police our inner most thoughts in a way we shouldn’t accept. Otherwise, all we do is lie about them, to ourselves and others. I would argue that genuine moral and spiritual growth requires self-knowledge, including of the darker parts of our personality we are less comfortable with.


There is a difference between experiencing negative emotions - particularly fear and anger - and holding on to them. I agree it can be extremely harmful to deny or repress those emotions. It’s equally if not more damaging to nurture them, justify them, cling to them.

I would suggest that the best way to deal with those emotions is to recognise them in oneself, accept them without judgement, but then to detach from them, to let them go, and if you are of a spiritual disposition, to ask God or the Universe to remove them from you.

In my experience, the only thing policing my inner thoughts is myself; or rather, the ego, which is not the true self, but would have me believe it is.

Incidentally, the poet Ted Hughes talked about the huge leap forward artists sometimes took, when they learned to “outwit their inner policeman”. This inspired an excellent comic poem by Wendy Cope, called “Policing the Unconscious of Ted Hughes”
 

Laika

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
There is a difference between experiencing negative emotions - particularly fear and anger - and holding on to them. I agree it can be extremely harmful to deny or repress those emotions. It’s equally if not more damaging to nurture them, justify them, cling to them.

I would suggest that the best way to deal with those emotions is to recognise them in oneself, accept them without judgement, but then to detach from them, to let them go, and if you are of a spiritual disposition, to ask God or the Universe to remove them from you.

In my experience, the only thing policing my inner thoughts is myself; or rather, the ego, which is not the true self, but would have me believe it is.

Incidentally, the poet Ted Hughes talked about the huge leap forward artists sometimes took, when they learned to “outwit their inner policeman”. This inspired an excellent comic poem by Wendy Cope, called “Policing the Unconscious of Ted Hughes”

I would like to be a writer, so this is very much based on the need to “outwit my inner policeman” when I’m thinking about controversial ideas or reasoning them out in much greater detail than is conventionally necessary.

Many of the ideas we accept are based on authority and on peer pressure because it is an easy point of reference without having expert knowledge in a subject. Its a natural part of our socialisation that we assimilate social norms. Its the same with out emotions as what we feel affects how we behave, so some emotions are expected to be repressed to reduce conflict even if this is unhealthy.

I don’t have strong objections to notions of “love thy neighbour” or even “love thy enemy”, but it is this small print where we end up doing something based on fear of disapproval because others expect us to that I find problematic. I take the same view of “positive psychology” (what little I understand of it at least) as I have the right to be upset and not cajoled in to rationalising it or putting a happy face on things in order to conform. Sometimes conflict is necessary for personal growth and those dark emotions are just telling us where we have to go to improve ourselves.
 

Nimos

Well-Known Member
is compassion, love necessary for humanism? is a healthy mind, a healthy spirit, necessary to a healthy body, a social status?


i'm an atheist. i believe and trust in the law of reciprocity and that love is a necessary, healthy, and curative thing
Compassion and love is necessary for humanism, but to be honest I think an understanding of these is needed for almost anything.

I don't really understand the question but even though I'm an atheist I try and follow the 2nd greatest Christian commandment and that is to treat others how I would like to be treated. Sometimes it's not that easy.
That is not really a good commandment to follow :) What if someone like to inflict pain or sexual harass others? But don't really care or might even enjoy these things being done to them, then doing it to others would be perfectly fine according to this commandment? :)
 

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
I would like to be a writer, so this is very much based on the need to “outwit my inner policeman” when I’m thinking about controversial ideas or reasoning them out in much greater detail than is conventionally necessary.

Many of the ideas we accept are based on authority and on peer pressure because it is an easy point of reference without having expert knowledge in a subject. Its a natural part of our socialisation that we assimilate social norms. Its the same with out emotions as what we feel affects how we behave, so some emotions are expected to be repressed to reduce conflict even if this is unhealthy.

I don’t have strong objections to notions of “love thy neighbour” or even “love thy enemy”, but it is this small print where we end up doing something based on fear of disapproval because others expect us to that I find problematic. I take the same view of “positive psychology” (what little I understand of it at least) as I have the right to be upset and not cajoled in to rationalising it or putting a happy face on things in order to conform. Sometimes conflict is necessary for personal growth and those dark emotions are just telling us where we have to go to improve ourselves.


Yeah, we are heavily socialised - over socialised apes, my old psychiatric nursing tutor used to call us. Between trying to appease others, and that policeman in our head, it's no wonder we struggle with our mental health.

As an aspiring writer, I'm sure you know never to underestimate the power of the pen; not least as a therapeutic tool. Martin Amis was asked in an interview once, if he was a cynic who saw the world as a sinister, threatening place, and he said not really, because he got all that stuff out in his novels. Charles Bukowski once described his writing career as the longest suicide note in history - but he avoided suicide and lived into his 70s.

To return to the subject of emotions; if we are to be judged - leaving aside for a moment the question of who or what is doing the judging - it must surely be for our actions, not our feelings nor our thoughts. But emotions can cloud judgement and lead to poor choices and bad actions. Besides which, from my own experience, fear and anger are deeply corrosive, and more damaging to ourselves than to the targets of our ire. So it's best to be rid of them, and of jealousy and lust also, but we do not free ourselves from negative emotions by repressing them. We have to find a way of bringing them into the light, and only then can we let them go.
 

John53

I go leaps and bounds
Premium Member
Compassion and love is necessary for humanism, but to be honest I think an understanding of these is needed for almost anything.


That is not really a good commandment to follow :) What if someone like to inflict pain or sexual harass others? But don't really care or might even enjoy these things being done to them, then doing it to others would be perfectly fine according to this commandment? :)

Fair enough. Never thought of it that way but I'm nice so it works for me lol
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
i believe and trust in the law of reciprocity and that love is a necessary, healthy, and curative thing
Love is a big deceiver. You see how many love stories end up in divorce. I will put my faith in reciprocity. Love the lovable, and take appropriate action for what is not lovable. In short - be practical.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
New is compassion, love necessary for humanism?

Not really, but it helps


is a healthy mind, a healthy spirit, necessary to a healthy body, a social status?

Mind, no
Spirit, whats a spirit?

I know of mentally ill people who are bodily fit as Athletes
I know of bad guys who spend hours in the gym.

I try and follow the 2nd greatest Christian commandment

My take on that is 'do until others as they would do unto you, only do it first'
 

Nimos

Well-Known Member
Fair enough. Never thought of it that way but I'm nice so it works for me lol
As long as one doesn't really think to much about and just hold it as a general saying, it is good enough :) But it always gets thrown out there as if its some amazing saying by Jesus, but it really doesn't make a lot of sense once you think about it.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
That is the problem. Why should anybody think? Thinking is a satanic act. Is not what is written in scripture enough for you?
 

PureX

Veteran Member
To exist is better than to not exist because non-existence is valueless.

To exist as a human, requires society. We cannot exist alone.

This necessitates arbitration on our, and on everyone's part. When we refuse the arbitrate our behaviors for the sake of our society, we actively destroy ourselves and each other.

This does not require faith in the gods to understand, or embody. Though faith in the gods is often based on our recognition of this existential axiom.

The rule: the better for your existence, the better for mine. And likewise. Cooperation instead of competition. This is literally the difference between 'good and evil'.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
if a humanist isn't love and respect for our fellow man, neighbor a necessity. or have you ever thought of love as a basic human need in your belief system.

I'm not sure what you are asking exactly. It sounds like you want to know if compassion is a requirement for humanism. I'll answer that.

Secular humanism is the Western reaction to the Christian worldview.
  • Where Christianity tells of a world containing a God who answers prayer and performs miracles, the metaphysics of secular humanism posits a godless universe obeying the unconscious laws of physics.
  • Where Christianity extols faith as a means of knowing and revelation a source of knowledge of what is true and what is good and right, humanism substitutes skeptical empiricism to determine what is true, and rational ethics to decide what is good and right according to utilitarian principles.
  • Where Christianity says right is whatever God says or does (divine command theory of ethics), humanists seek the right set of rules - laws, mores - to facilitate the maximum number of people having what they need to pursue happiness as they understand it.
  • Where Christianity extols faith as the highest virtue, humanism values reason.
  • Humanism also departs from Christianity in its estimation of mankind (and why it's called). Christianity has long taught that man is dependent on God, will naturally make a mess of things if left to himself because of his sin nature, and can't really understand the mysteries of God without help from God which is acquired through prayer. Humanism teaches that any progress man makes will have to come from man, and although many human beings are base and seem to prefer death and mayhem, some are noble and brilliant, and that these people are man's only and best hope for a better future.
So where does compassion fit in? At the level of rational ethics, where humanists strive to create economic and social opportunity for all and to promote democracy, individual autonomy, guaranteed personal rights, and self-actualization through education.

But what if one feels no compassion? If he's a sociopath, he won't be attracted to any of that just described.

Still, humanism isn't a program. One doesn't choose it. One chooses reason and social justice, and the rest follows automatically. That was the case with me. I was an atheist who tried Christianity for a decade, then returned to atheism. Being basically well-intentioned and respectful of critical thinking, I would eventually conform to humanism before ever knowing the term. I remember looking at The Affirmations Of Humanism for the first time, and thinking, yeah, that. That's me.

Humanism doesn't tell us how to live. It's a description of how we see the world, how we think it works. For life advice, we look elsewhere. For me, it was looking to myself and trial and error - what accomplishes my goals and what doesn't, those goals being to be safe, free of want or need, loved, respected, self-respected, develop a sense of purpose and meaning, be as free of guilt, shame, and anxiety as possible, and the like.

One has to discover which habits facilitate that goal, and which are barriers or self-defeating habits. How often should I meet obligations? How reliable should I be? When is violence or other confrontation appropriate? How do I want to be perceived by others and how do I accomplish that? When is it good or OK to lie? What is the place of courage, integrity, and loyalty in living life? Can we cut corners there and benefit, or will that lead to unhappiness? What are the best habits to cultivate?

Once again, after I had begun answering most of these questions for myself, I saw Buddha's recommendations, and once again, I said, hmm, I guess I'm on the right track. I don't agree with it all, but this sounds roughly like what I have already decided is the path most likely to facilitate lasting satisfaction
  • "In brief, the eight elements of the path are: (1) correct view, an accurate understanding of the nature of things, specifically the Four Noble Truths, (2) correct intention, avoiding thoughts of attachment, hatred, and harmful intent, (3) correct speech, refraining from verbal misdeeds such as lying, divisive speech, harsh speech, and senseless speech, (4) correct action, refraining from physical misdeeds such as killing, stealing, and sexual misconduct, (5) correct livelihood, avoiding trades that directly or indirectly harm others, such as selling slaves, weapons, animals for slaughter, intoxicants, or poisons, (6) correct effort, abandoning negative states of mind that have already arisen, preventing negative states that have yet to arise, and sustaining positive states that have already arisen, (7) correct mindfulness, awareness of body, feelings, thought, and phenomena (the constituents of the existing world), and (8) correct concentration, single-mindedness."
So, there are no rules in humanism. It's not a program like Scientology. There's no studying or qualifying. So one doesn't really need to be compassionate to see himself as a humanist. He may just be rational and come to similar conclusions about how best to treat people even with no sense of connection to them.

Hope that answers your question.
 
Last edited:

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
is compassion, love necessary for humanism? is a healthy mind, a healthy spirit, necessary to a healthy body, a social status?

i'm an atheist. i believe and trust in the law of reciprocity and that love is a necessary, healthy, and curative thing

I find that embracing utilitarianism works for me :)
 
Top