Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site wucs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!hou3c!hocda!houxm!ihnp4!afinitc!wuphys!wucs!esk
From: esk@wucs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Re: Annotated Humanist (Bottom of the 3rd)
Message-ID: <250@wucs.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 15-May-84 16:17:16 EDT
Article-I.D.: wucs.250
Posted: Tue May 15 16:17:16 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 16-May-84 07:45:23 EDT
Organization: Wash. Univ. in St. Louis, CS Dept.
Lines: 74

[Once more into the fray!]

Rich Rosen: Is there a Christian out there who'd like to speak out?

	O.K., I'll take a crack at it.  What follows is an attempt to
give another Christian perspective on humanism, with maybe a little less
recourse to religion, and hopefully a little less combustibility.  I
hope this will provide a more palatable and more rational-sounding (!!)
look at the issue for Rich and his fellow humanists.

	Basically, our objections (or at least my objections) to
humanism can be broken down into a few major humanistic beliefs which we
disagree with.

1)	Humanists believe there is ONLY an objective reality.

	Although both Christians and humanists seem to agree on the
existence of an objective reality (i.e. we exist, and the universe
exists independent of our own perceptions), to a Christian, and the
followers of most other religions, the story doesn't end there.  We
believe in some "force" which is external to the universe and which may
project things (such as morality, definitions of good and evil, etc.)
into our world.  Of course, I believe that I have perceived such
projections, by the force which I call God, and you don't.  Whether this
is due to a flaw in my perception or in yours is pretty much unarguable,
we could never prove things one way or the other.  The same applies to
the existence of God, putting aside his projections into our world. 
Because He is, by definition, existing outside of our perceptions (if He
exists at all), there is no way to argue for or against His existence,
except for His projections into our world, or lack thereof.  Thus, in a
sense, you make exactly the same "leap of faith" we do when you assume
the non-existence of any force external to the universe.

2)	Humanists believe that man is rational.

	This is an underlying principle of humanism that seems to fly in
the face of reality, not only to religious people, but also to many
non-religious people I know.  I know that I certainly act irrationaly at
times, and that I am surrounded by people who appear to act irrationaly
much of the time, also.  Even the idea that this is from environmental
factors (If they were only raised right....) doesn't hold much water
when compared with historical examples going back to the Spartans all
the way up to the Nazis.  (This is NOT an attempt to associate humanists
with either group!)  But in all cases, no matter how society tried, some
of the kids would always seem not to turn out quite right, showing
alarming proclivity toward emotionalism and other no-nos.  In general, I
think this point is the major stumbling block for humanism with both
religious and non-religious people.

3)	Humanists desire a structureless society.

	This is actually a result of 1) and 2), but has problems of its
own.  Now, I may be misinterpreting some of Rich's articles, but it sure
sounds to me like humanism basically advocates anarchy as the best form
of organization for society.  We object to this not only because we
believe there is an objective good which society should attempt to
preserve (see 1) and a need to regulate man to preserve the general
welfare (because of 2), but also because anarchy is not a very efficient
form of society.  Basically, without the structures our society gives
us, we would be unable to feed our current population, much less
maintain their standard of living.  As a possible victim of this
starvation, I object to such an idea.  Thus, from a purely
economic/political/sociological standpoint, humanism seems to fail to
provide a realistic answer.

	I hope this has been helpful in clearing up some
misunderstanding, and that I have not misrepresented anyone (either the
humanists or my fellow Christians) too badly.  (I'm sure I'll hear about
it if I have!)

						Eric Kaylor

...ihnp4!afinitc!wucs!esk