It's hardly rigorous but unsurprisingly (to me anyway) I am, apparently, 100% humanist.
How humanist are you?
I was 63%. BUT YESTERDAY.
There is a couple of questions i couldn't answer because there was no option.
But keith you are the person most like i on this site i believe. I'm a little ruthless as i think you are. Yes no ?
I remember read8ng something you write once about we only are here for 100 years so who cares " kinda deal ".
Ummmmm, you can't really write about we shouldn't care about anything.
You can't type things like, Stealing something means you get it for free.
However it doesn't work if we all lie, cheat and steal.
Look i don't know where I'm going with this now.
63% i was.
Good day keith.
You didn't say if it was a good game....!
63% - I think that means you're 100% humanist, except for 1.5 of your legs.
I'm 90% humanist, and I agree. I think it was because I don't trust 100% in science, evidently because science has its limitations.
We calculate you are 67% humanist.
You may be an agnostic, or culturally religious. Humanism may be for you - do have a look around our site. You could also sign up for our weekly e-bulletin.
NOT SCIENCE has limitations..the idiot HUMANS that invented it and who abuse it .....CREATE the LIMITATIONS...
The fact that any topic can have differing POSSIBILITIES in its interpretation PROVES that SCIENCE
is an approach to information gathering and validation...
Not so with many RETARDED Parasite VAMPIRE Religions and GODS...all are human inventions
just like a Circus-Broadway theater and every other human fabricated endeavor where there is a
division of POWER and CONTROL by the few over the many...
A "GOD"is the perfect COVER for using FEAR - intimidation - violence as control tools....
Everything is all about how it is INTERPRETED...those human FOOLS that fall for the "GOD" hoax
are trapped in a maze without an exit and end up in CONCENTRATION CAMP CULTS....
SCIENCE is a METHOD approach to information and validation on a topic...
GOD and Religion are a TOOL used by psychopaths for power and control
When HUMANS debate - interact - collaborate +++ without resorting to FEAR - INTIMIDATION - VIOLENCE to force
a view on others...then HUMANS have TRANSCENDED the limitations of the retarded Parasite VAMPIRE invented
GODS, Comic Book Bible, Koran, Torah, idiotic CULT Dogmas..+++ so much more imposed by the Religious
PSYCHOPATH mind and life MOLESTERS
SOLUTION = relegate the middle East JEW - JESUS - ALLAH God invented garbage to MEANINGLESS MYTHOLOGY
for cheap entertainment only....and let the HUMANITY of being HUMAN BEGIN !
I answered all the questions honestly and got a 90%, then I went back and did it again changing only my answer to the question about animals and got a 100%.
My empathy says to treat animals kindly for the same reason that I treat people kindly. I would never personally mistreat an animal and if someone was abusing an innocent animal in front of me for no reason I would feel justified in inflicting the minimum amount of harm on the abuser required to make them stop if I thought I was able to stop it, but I could not in good conscience give a proper humanist answer to that question mere hours after eating several McChickens from McDonalds.
I could justify it by saying that I am not able to prevent the mass mistreatment of farmed animals but what if I was in a position to stop it? I still would not, and if asked why I would likely give the utilitarian response that doing so would inflict harm upon human society because our modern population levels require such things to sustain. As far as I know this utilitarian answer would be justified, but It certainly isn't emotionally fulfilling.
It puts people into boxes and makes assumptions that are unhelpful.
It suggests that answers to these questions are mutually exclusive - in many of them anyway.
There were several questions - I could not answer any of the suggested answers.
Seriously unhelpful - I suspect that its prejudices made it so.
I also think that humanism here is being defined by its modern context not by its historical one. I often claim to be a humanist. I don't see that as being opposed at all to being a Christian. Take many of history's humanists - who did not have an issue either - Calvin, Erasmus, Luther. Bacon.
I see no problem with identifying as a Christian and a humanist. Indeed I have had at least one person self describe as an atheist Christian. They claimed to follow the teachings of the man Jesus without believing in his divinity or indeed in any divinity (other than the dessert of course)
I am more than passing curious which questions you found impossible to answer.
Not that difficult. Most of the questions were framed with a bias. Take for instance the questions relating to a holy book. I might well believe that the bible contains answers to some questions on morality - but not because it is a sacred or holy book. It also is not exhaustive. If it were to ask the question - as to which sources do you come to an understanding? - then my answer might well entail all. As it was put - though I could not answer any question - save as the one which humanists without God would probably answer. Hence it is really an unhelpful question. Also look at the question on government - is this a question of what we think ought to be the right way - or in particular circumstances - an ideal or - what? I could not answer the question - because it simply was inaccurate.
We live in countries - mostly - (in the West) where the prevailing civil laws are built on religious premises. This is fact - we don't have to agree that they are good or bad - but it is a fact.
I just found it a very unhelpful survey.
While I am uncertain about other countries the United States does not base its laws on any religious doctrine. In fact to do so wpuld be unconstitutional.
While it is true that the US constitution forbids such an overt thing as to uphold religious ideals or discrimination - the US is still a common law nation with common law principles and rulings. As such - it cannot avoid the fact that many of its laws are based upon religious doctrines. Go and get a copy of Blackstone's commentaries. These are the most famous legal commentaries in Common Law history. It provides interesting reading.
Similarly, in Australia we have a constitutional position which forbids the government making laws to establish any particular religion - and yet the head of our government, the queen of the commonwealth MUST be a protestant. Not only that our constitution - clearly invokes God in its preamble - making it without doubt a religion document. Nevertheless, many including our high court justices - regurgitate the notion that we are a secular nation.
To be honest, I am not sure how they figure this. Constitutionally, we clearly are not secular. On a pure concrete numbers of population basis we are not. Our laws - as long as they remain - under common law deny it. Yet, we repeat it and repeat it. So it must be the case.
What makes a nation religious? Its constitution, its laws, its majority of persons? Great question - and the answer is: none. Our nation is secular because some people say it - and it gets repeated. I think this makes a mockery of the people and of our laws and our constitution.
Could you please give an example of a US law that has its basis in religious doctrine?
According to Blackstone, murder, theft, perjury, etc.
But I would add civil laws relating to negligence when people violate people's home during the night verse how they do so at day time. The laws are essentially taken directly from the OT.
Christianity came to the UK in the 6th century. Are you suggesting there were no laws against theft and murder before then?
I am, apparently, 100% humanist.
That's today. What about tomorrow? You never seem to be able to make your mind up. One minute you tell us that your an out and out atheist, next your translating what it is some biblical character means.
According to Blackstone, murder, theft, perjury, etc.But I would add civil laws relating to negligence when people violate people's home during the night verse how they do so at day time. The laws are essentially taken directly from the OT.
Strictures against murder and theft appear in legal systems thay predate Judaism. Where did the Summerians and Mesopotamians get the idea? Perhaps you should examine the idea that old testament law is based on other older penal codes reworked to fit the (secular and spiritual) beliefs of the Hebrew people.
Humanist are just organized atheists. The thing they loath to be.
Welcome back, however temporarily!
Fuck you, coward.
Actually Christianity went to the UK in the first century and even the Catholic church records UK bishops attending to the ecumenical councils prior to 6th century.
Also - I was not talking merely about Christianity - religion in general and I believe though I may be mistaken that other religions existed prior to Christianity, even in England.