“The greatest insult to humanism is that man needs a god in order to have a moral framework. The moral framework that comes from god is always tested against mans own morals and the idea that we don’t know right from wrong. But then we have to take it from words dictated from a rather hot-headed neurotic desert tribe is just insulting” -Stephen Fry. It’s so easy even a comedian gets it!
The humanist morals compared to the morals of the nomadic tribe? Hmm
Secular humanism. “The philosophy or life stance of secular humanism embraces human reason, ethics, social justice, and philosophical naturalism while specifically rejecting religious dogma, supernaturalism, pseudoscience, and superstition as the bases of morality and decision making”.
It is painstakingly ridiculous to sift through an archaic and divisive text dictated by a cruel nomadic desert tribe thousands of years ago to determine which is moral or immoral for our time. Theirs was an immoral and violent time that would not pass any litmus test of decency today.
“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited, whereas imagination embraces the entire world, stimulating progress, giving birth to evolution.” ~Albert Einstein
But imagination with knowledge……Unimaginable–TCA
TheCommonAtheist 
I fully endorse humanism, though I’m not a big fan of the word humanism. Does that make sense?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes. I still have a bit to learn but I’d trust it over religion
LikeLiked by 2 people
I get a lot of stuff fed to me from Professor Taboo. That’s were I got the idea for this. Thanks boss!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
All the morality we have has been worked out by man and man alone and is a work in progress with some basic elements that have stood the test of time in all societies. We are slowly getting better….if only religious nonsense would get out of the way, we could well be on our way to a more peaceful, tolerant earth loving society in all countries.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Since all morality has been designed by men under the guise of a god, ww would benefit from starting over except have all things out in the open. No hidden phony gods, just men and women.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for your honesty.
The problem with Stephen Fry’s approach is that it still leads to the possibility of 7 billion different moral frameworks. Looking around, I don’t see mankind doing very well with that approach. We’re still going to need a unifying framework, and even your fellow humanists will still disagree with you on the everyday nuts and bolts and millions of shades of gray apparent in a framework, causing discord and chaos.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well it is a work in progress. I think the first step is social equality. We’re not there yet, but inching closer. The ideas promoting violence everywhere should be the real X rating, not sex. I believe Abrahamic religions used tight controls on sex very similar to a troop of monkeys, and if you look it was all about territory, sex, and food. Abraham and Mohammed had very similar ways to maintain control. Make it against the rules of the book very few could read and call it god. Just a thought , but it sure feels on point.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Except that the same rules held up once everyone became able to read it during the Reformation, sir. And once they were thrown off in the 60s, well, I look around and don’t see much good there, either.
As someone who’s followed the “tight controls” his entire life, I can tell you I don’t see what the big deal is. It’s not hard to live a chaste life! 🙂
LikeLike
Chastity is not really an issue. Christians are no more chaste than anyone else. They just deny it more. Surveys on that are quite conclusive. And in the macro, this is the safest time in the history of the world to be alive. It’s not because of religion, it’s because of awareness and struggle for human equality by the non religious
LikeLiked by 2 people
Christianity is the strongest force for human equality there is, bro! It lifts up all races, both genders, and people from every SES rung. The most powerful nations in the world, the ones driving scientific advancement and modern ethics (on multiple continents) are the ones that emerged from the Judeo-Christian persuasion.
LikeLike
They speak of equality but it is also fought by them. Speaking and doing are two different things. But it works. Look at politics.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Absolutely. But that only proves the Christian doctrine of total depravity – the evil human heart distorting and ignoring good doctrine. Even institutionalized religion can’t fix that. Jesus’ words didn’t expect it to; Paul’s developmental theology didn’t expect it to. That’s not a reason for Christians to relax and do whatever they like, of course, but it does show that Christians’ flaws aren’t an apologetics “gotcha”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Brandon.
I was reading your exchanges with Jim above. I am simply curious. How many various cultures, nations, cities/towns, outside of your birthplace or hometown or native country have you visited for at least 2-months or more (simply absorbing their ways/lifestyles) or lived in/with around the world? Not speaking about book-knowledge or American news sources — referring to firsthand, in-person experiences.
Thank you sir.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Spent four years teaching on two different Native American reservations. Have spent a total of three months in the Czech Republic.
Why do you ask?
LikeLike
He asks because he wants to dismiss everything you say.
My guess is, if he replies at all, it will be with his arbitrary criterion for “expert” which you will fail to meet. You will then be subjected to a trillion-word essay about the value of “consensus” for determining reality. It won’t be incoherent in every possible way. Pointing this out to the Professor will only demonstrate your inability to grasp enlightened intellectualism.
LikeLiked by 1 person
…meant to say “will be incoherent”…sorry…
LikeLike
You have a huge ego. Maybe someone else could have a turn. Did you homeschool? Your playground manners are a bad. Tsk tsk. Brandi sounds like he can take care of himself. At least he had a point where you just babble to watch the clutter roll from your keyboard and say nothing.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yes, thank you for your honest answer Brandon.
I asked because those five above statements you made suggests that you’ve experienced in depth and at length many world cultures and peoples on several different continents. I was asking to confirm those implications. They are truly bold, far-reaching claims that if true, would certainly be better supported by first-hand knowledge or would need to be… along the lines of a Curriculum Vitae, Resume, or References provided to a hiring manager.
Now respectfully, there’s nothing wrong with personal theories or opinions or Op-Ed articles/comments if noted that way, but I feel — and I’m sure many others here feel — that bold statements like those should be backed-up or sources cited, etc, lending more credence.
Are there more places, peoples, or cultures you’ve lived in (2+ months) and thoroughly learned about that perhaps you forgot to mention? Assuming you are a natural-born American, how many years and months of your entire life have you spent here in the states?
Sorry for my delay responding and thanks for your continued, honest answers Brandon. 🙂
LikeLike
As I’ve shared with you already Jim, I particularly like Harvard University’s (retired) Dr. E.O. Wilson’s Naturalist approach to the origins of morality/ethics and its development and failures:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1998/04/the-biological-basis-of-morality/377087/
Though there are notable accolades in Transcendental formulations as well as Empirical/Natural formulations, specific Transcendental or religious constructs, particularly the hardcore Closed-systemic ones, will NOT be able to evolve, flex and keep up with the perpetual Empirical/Natural open-system — or the ‘grey nuts-n-bolts’ that are mentioned above and framed in a negative light — of ever evolving refinement. In other words, it is exactly the diversity of these contributing parts (good, sufficient, or bad) that do indeed (often, not always) BENEFIT the whole at varying times of progress. The Closed antiquated religions, ideologies, and social paradigms (e.g. the orthodox Abrahamic religions/sects/denominations) that are too afraid of diversity (which hedges against forms of oppressive atrocious monisms) will in fact go extinct in time. Like all living organisms, entities on this planet and the known Universe, if there is no functioning mechanisms of adaptation or change… they die out.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Afraid because… their children will see the real world and leave the religion. So much for the freewill they believe in.
LikeLiked by 1 person
In 2000 years of Christian dominated influence the best progressions I’ve seen are from people that have fought it. Any human rights advocate would not approve of the historical tactics, including the guilt and hell to force compliance. Nearly half of the worlds Abrahamic religion still consider blasphemy or atheism a capital crime. Christians are just waiting for Jesus to dispense wrath on unbelievers. Muslims aren’t waiting. Very similar in the end though.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That is very true Jim. Yet, as I’m sure you know also, it is VERY understated! LOL 😛
Perhaps because subjects like history, social-sciences, paleoanthropology, the evolution of linguistics, the convergences and deconvergences of religiosity and state-governing, are often “boring” subjects to the busy average person/student — plus, a career in those fields are not piles of treasure or 10-figure paychecks — no matter their IMMENSE values, we now have a possible Age of Disenlightenment or Ignorance (by neglect or choice). 😦
I say that because there are way too many people, groups, and institutions (especially in the U.S.) that desperately cling to those antiquated, dysfunctional paradigms and ideologies at the cost of better, quicker progress and advancements — the biggest sacrifice(?): individual empowerment and freedom to ingeniously create!!!
LikeLiked by 2 people
“I say that because there are way too many people, groups, and institutions (especially in the U.S.) that desperately cling to those antiquated, dysfunctional paradigms and ideologies at the cost of better, quicker progress and advancements — the biggest sacrifice(?): individual empowerment and freedom to ingeniously create!!!”
Bravo! Exactly right! I say again, Bravo!!
I do not possess your verbosity so I’ll defer to your expertise. Please list several specific examples of antiquated, dysfunctional paradigms to which people in the U.S. still desperately cling. I’m sure you’re correct about this, I just can’t think of anything. It seems to me that antiquated, dysfunctional paradigms are discarded when they become obsolete. Who are these clingers and what are the paradigms to which they cling?
LikeLike
You would be able to answer this yourself JB if you really wanted to know, but I can assist you. This is not an exhaustive list by the way.
Here are a few well-known, long-standing, (antiquated) controversial viewpoints in the U.S.:
• Young Earth Creationism — this lunacy needs no elaboration from me.
• Abortion — the killing of a human being, which defies the Word of God. The “Word of God” is by no means an embryologic factual guidebook as to when the fetus becomes an actual human baby. The issue is completely out of its jurisdiction or relevance.
• Death Penalties — There is no one consensus from Christian churches whether the death penalty is Godly or not. Why is this? One big reason is because their Holy Scriptures are unclear, confusing, or inconclusive. The Southern Baptists, National Association of Evangelicals, and the majority of Lutheran Churches believe it is Godly… the Catholic Church, Presbyterian Church (USA), United Methodist Church, United Church of Christ, and Evangelical Lutheran Church believe it is NOT Godly. The common denominator between them all? Their “Holy Scriptures.”
• Common Core Standards in Education — any institution or organization that explicitely or implicitely believes, teaches, or promotes an inherent negativity of children’s natural abilities to learn and apply healthy life-skills, civil responsibility, social justice, multiculturalism/pluralism, and higher-order thinking outside of tradition and orthodoxy… is detrimental (antiquated) to that society’s advancement and to that child’s advancement.
A child’s or an adult’s creativity and ingenuity is proportional to the available levels of freedom, liberty, and access to ALL information/data available and possible. For example, age appropriate sexual experimentation and expression, sexual reproduction (e.g. anatomy, endocrinology, psychology) of all genders, and sexual or semi-sexual (touching, flirting) boundaries and appropriateness (vs. assault or rape).
Some lesser-known, long-standing (antiquated) controversial paradigms in the U.S. are:
• Prenatal Sexual Orientation — embryonic, hormonal, and genetic sciences are increasingly showing that sexual attraction is in large part determined by Nature BEFORE birth, then later refined post-natally and by environment. For quick reference, see the highly acclaimed PBS series “9-Months That Made You“ for actual video of evidence, and the Intersex Society of North America for the general statistical numbers (reported) of prenatal sexual and non-sexual conditions here: http://www.isna.org/faq/frequency
Also see the career work of Kenneth S. Kendler, MD, Director of the Virginia Institute for Psychiatric and Behavioral Genetics: 2000 American Journal of Psychiatry article “Sexual Orientation in a U.S. National Sample of Twin and Non-Twin Sibling Pairs”; Brian S. Mustanski, PhD, Assistant Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Illinois at Chicago: Human Genetics article “A Genomewide Scan of Male Sexual Orientation”; Ebru Demir, PhD, Researcher at the Institute of Molecular Biotechnology of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, and Barry J. Dickson, PhD, former Scientific Director of the Institute of Molecular Biotechnology of the Austrian Academy of Sciences their 2000 Cell article titled “Fruitless Splicing Specifies Male Courtship Behavior in Drosophila”; Dean H. Hamer, PhD, former Chief of the Section on Gene Structure and Regulation at the Laboratory of Biochemistry at the National Cancer Institute, his 1993 Science article “A Linkage Between DNA Markers on the X Chromosome and Male Sexual Orientation”; and Kenneth M. Cohen, PhD, Lecturer in Human Development at Cornell University, his 2002 Archives of Sexual Behavior article “Relationships Among Childhood Sex-Atypical Behavior, Spatial Ability, Handedness, and Sexual Orientation in Men”… to list just 5 medical-scientific experts.
This real physical prenatal evidence goes against sexual, gender, and relational teachings of all three Abrahamic religions as found in their sacred manuscripts, therefore making them wrong and antiquated.
• Palestinian-Israeli Conflict — since about 1096 CE definitively, but most certainly since the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement and the 1917 Balfour Letter (then Declaration), Palestine is NOT a two-nation State, but one. Israel is unequivocally an invaded, occupying people with no humane or legally legitimate claim to be there. Period. The fact that the region is still divided and still volatile or at war is sufficient secondary evidence the old paradigm or ideology or beliefs of ownership are BEYOND antiquated even today! For starters see Dr. Juan Coles’ extensive work here:
https://www.juancole.com/2010/03/top-ten-reasons-east-jerusalem-does-not.html
Also reference the work of Sharif Nashashibi, MA, freelance journalist and analyst on Arab Affairs, in his March 2016 opinion piece titled “Israel-Palestine: The Delusion of a Two-State Solution”; William Roe Polk, MA, PhD, foreign policy consultant, in his July 2014 article, “We Should All Be Frightened by What’s Happening in Israel”; Musa al-Gharbi, MA, Managing Editor at the Southwest Initiative for the Study of Middle East Conflicts (SISMEC), in his Jan. 2015 Op-Ed titled “Israel and Palestinians Need a One-State Solution”; Ali Abunimah, MA, Co-founder of the Electronic Intifada, in an April 2014 Op-Ed for the New York Times titled “Only a Single-State Solution Will Bring Peace”… to list just 4 historical researchers on the deadlock conflict perpetuated by extremely faulty antiquated ideologies!
• One Path to Salvation — with the two primary controversies being “Faith vs. Works” and “Predestination vs. Free-Will,” after 2+ millenia and counting humanity nor Christians are unanimously clear on exact details of “Godly” behavior that results in admittance or election into Heaven! Much better explanations and plausible/highly compelling answers are found elsewhere in a variety of secular disciplines. For starters, see my aforementioned link to Harvard University’s (retired) career work of Dr. E.O. Wilson:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1998/04/the-biological-basis-of-morality/377087/
Followed by the United Nations Universal Declaration of 30 Human Rights, found here:
http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Professor Taboo…a fabulous response and so clear cut, intelligent and backed up by research and science.
I’ve decided people like John and all the many brainwashed and indoctrinated religious nuts all over the world, especially the Abrahmic religions, are simply not capable of logic, rational or critical thinking. The pull of tribalism and being part of a group that demonizes and outcasts others, to feel superior, has superseded anything else. Plus it allows apathy to seep in since it’s much easier to not think and just let others tell you what to do and what you SHOULD think.
It is useless to argue or try to make a point or open their minds just a crack. They have put up a wall and closed their minds. It is their loss, but they don’t see it. A whole wide world of information, fascinating facts , incredible beauty in the natural world and the potential for peace and enlightenment for all. And they miss it all.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“It is painstakingly ridiculous to sift through an archaic and divisive text dictated by a cruel nomadic desert tribe thousands of years ago to determine which is moral or immoral for our time.”
Yeah!
Throw out the 10 commandments! They suck!
LikeLike
They are ineffective and would look great in a museum of mythological Moses’
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agreed. Completely ineffective.
Everyone should just do whatever feels right.
LikeLike
Which of the religious atrocities have been prevented by the Ten Commandments?
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Ten Commandments prevent no atrocities.
No law prevents atrocities.
Everyone should just do whatever feels right. No commandments. No laws. No invisible rule makers.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The point is it would be just as effective. I think the Muslims use them too when it suits their greater purpose. I hope you have a fabulous evening.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m agreeing with you!
Get rid of all those stupid rules.
Let everyone do whatever they feel is right. It’ll be great!
We won’t have to lock our doors. We won’t need passwords online. We can let our children get in cars with strangers. Let’s get rid of religion and just be humans.
LikeLike
Well since Moses was not real and those rules were made by regular men, don’t you think an up to date set would be just as effective? http://m.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-Ed-Contributors/The-Exodus-Does-archaeology-have-a-say-348464
LikeLiked by 1 person
No. An up to date set of rules won’t prevent atrocities either.
Humans have better morals than God. Get rid of religion. Unlock your door. Walk the streets of Detroit in safety. Let strangers babysit your kids. When there’s no religion, there’s nothing to worry about.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I hear parts of Gary Indiana are good like that too. Lol. Hey we don’t lock our doors and this a lawless bunch here in the mountains. They don’t break in because … I don’t know. Just good folks
LikeLiked by 1 person
And why would you need to lock up anyway. God is your rearward. He’s got your back. Put some “Holiness to the lord” plaques on your door posts. All good
LikeLiked by 1 person
There is no god, Jim. That’s the whole point! No god. No religion. Just humans being human. We don’t need an invisible ruler telling us what to do.
When we get rid of religion, we can shut down the government and disband the police force. We won’t need militaries either. And we won’t need money! Everyone will just share with each other equally for the good of mankind.
LikeLike
Would be nice. The point is that with or without religion, nothing would change except the mental breakdowns from not having someone watch over you…..Until he doesn’t. Then he gets a pass because he knows best.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Go away for a while. You are trying to mix faith and reason and it will never work.
LikeLike
I haven’t said anything about faith.
Is religion the main problem with mankind or not?
LikeLike
Yes. Main problem
LikeLike
That’s what I thought!
So get rid of religion and we won’t need police, government, military or money. We will allow humans to do whatever they want without threatening them with punishment for misbehaving. It’ll be beautiful!
LikeLike
Hey you better back off a bit with the ranting and your comment about Taboo was crap. You’re a guest here. Maybe you could learn something. I visit other blogs and your in it there too. Bring something useful or stay home.
LikeLike
Those are some utterly RIDICULOUS suggestions by him. 😳 Wow. Going from one extreme to the other is more counter-productive than helpful — it hints of bipolar disorder, mania, and/or schizophrenia… in my clinical experience. 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
I was going to ask him if he was ok. Really. He was either pretending well or multiple squirrels ran religious directions through his head.
LikeLiked by 1 person
🤣 🐿🐿🐿🐿🐿 🤯
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hahahahaha!!! Well, that sure as HELL can’t be done by non-stop fear-mongering and hyper-active, premature paranoia of everyone UNlike yourself. 🤣 (holding my ribs cuz they’re sore from laughing so hard and long!)
LikeLiked by 1 person
We can dream, can’t we?
Religion is responsible for every evil ever perpetrated. When religion is gone, civilization will be perfect. No more crime. No more violence. No more judgment or condemnation. No more guilt. Humanism unfettered by superstition. Bliss!
LikeLike
Take your meds John. It’s late
LikeLiked by 1 person
Define who is “we” first. That would help clear-up unnecessary confusion for a posteriori discussion so as not to waste further time. But in a general sense, of course people can dream. That’s stating the obvious. Now what those dreams might be or consist of should be defined as well. For example, some dreams are completely fictional. Some are pseudo-fictional. Some are a result or byproduct of recent or past events in the Dreamer’s life with some or many variations. I’d always ask, however, how much of dreams are a reflection of reality versus hope or delusion or a combination of those.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“We can dream” is also a figure of speech. It is similar to saying, “We can hope” or “It would be good if…”
I was trying to describe the Utopian state of humanity that would exist after all religion is eradicated. We would no longer need laws or government. We wouldn’t need rules. There would be no need to threaten people with punishment. Selfishness would disappear along with religion. Everyone would act according to what is best for all mankind. That’s my understanding of the humanist position anyway.
LikeLike
🤔 … Okay. Your idea of Utopia is (grossly?) oversimplified and your idea of Humanism is flawed. I do not have time to go into extensive discussions as to why or why not. I will quickly say this…
Your Utopian world(?) description would be an improbable (unrealistic?) even an entirely delusional “dream.” Why? Simply because you are attempting to synthesize micro with macro systems when they function fine as two separate entities of management and exchange. Order, laws, agencies, education, growth opportunities, protection, etc, all the components of functioning family groups (with its deficiences & successes) and functioning city or nation-states with similar but different components… thrive when the micro-systems serve the families and communities and the macro-systems serve the city or nation-state while also channeling between themselves necessary information and updates for the “whole” and its “parts.” A simple analogy is that our human arms function differently than our legs, but the still serve the whole.
Have a good day JB. I know that you have a ton more to read and process elsewhere, for instance, my examples of antiquated, dysfunctional paradigms to which people in the U.S. still desperately cling up above AND/OR here…
https://wordpress.com/read/blogs/139182528/posts/1401#comment-1518
…which sufficiently elaborates that the antiquated concept of Jesus’ Messiahship or divine uniqueness is wrong and unfounded. The independent historical evidence and records show it to be.
Take LOTS of time to read, examine, compare, and contrast those two earlier comments and their content, with your past and current knowledge… as impartially as possible. Take weeks if necessary.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It shouldn’t take LOTS of time to read, examine, compare and contrast your comments. If you’re pumping out comments that require weeks of intense study…you’re pumping out bullshit.
Verbosity is evidence of muddled thinking. If you can’t boil your beliefs down to a few simple statements, you don’t know what you believe.
LikeLike
We can be concise, but that doesn’t work for a believer. Maybe a good hard look at evidence below the surface would help. Wonderful opportunity!
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Maybe a good hard look at evidence below the surface would help.”
Fire away, Jim! Give me the evidence!
LikeLike
If I give you the evidence you’ll just want references to prove it, and then you won’t read them anyway. 1st step is letting go of all your stakes in the first century. If you can muster the energy to look outside if the Bible for a minute it’s not that hard to find. Prof gave you plenty. If that’s not good enough just go away.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jim,
J. BrainYawn seems to be amply demonstrating that when the lengthy, compelling, cumulative, independent evidence is readily placed in front of him, he hasn’t the ability (capacity?) to study it and ask us questions about the content. That could/does indicate he is utterly afraid, paralyzed(?) of the outcome. After all, paralysis is a very common condition among FAITH-followers.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Or equally valid, you are simple-minded and VERY lazy. Either way, bothers me none here.
Does that mean you are not going to even glance at anything? LOL 🤭 That’s a rhetorical question!
And it’s just 32 words for ya. 🤯😄
LikeLike
I read everything you wrote.
I’m neither simple nor lazy.
That’s partly why I’m so annoying.
LikeLike
Here is the answer https://thecommonathiest.wordpress.com/2018/01/11/wurtzite-boron-nitride-and-the-apologist-mind/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ah. I’m a dummy.
That’s very helpful. Thank you!
LikeLike
Any time
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t believe, as Brandon says, that the most advancing scientific countries are from the Judeo-Christian religions. I don’t believe these countries would qualify for that statement.
https://royalsociety.org/news/2011/new-science-countries/
LikeLiked by 2 people
Only Americans think the world revolves around them. Good to get out sometimes. I see cool inventions popping up everywhere and it’s very awesome what others are doing outside our bubble of funneled information
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jim you are playing with someone who is more interested in the “game” than the logic
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes. He’s a guest and he better start acting like it. Thanks Mary. It was fun the first page but the nothingness ruins the comment section for everyone after that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hear hear Mary!!! You are spot on there. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person