Humanism Vs Religion

Therefore, the only reason one has to behave ‘morally’ is because god, the bible or Jesus says you should. Moreover, the consequences of behaving in contradiction to Christian values or behaving ‘immorally’ involve punishment by god whether it be in this life or the after-life. This philosophy sheds some light on why atheism is feared, despised and misunderstood as well as why atheists are persecuted in America. If there is no god to answer to or no consequences for ‘bad behavior’, why then, would anyone behave in a good moral fashion? What is to prevent deviant behavior, if there is no god? These questions are the main basis for the Christian argument which maintains that atheists are untrustworthy, immoral or amoral, social deviants and therefore lesser human beings. Some have gone as far to say that atheists are unpatriotic, un-American and do not even have the right to be acknowledged as citizens of the United States.

Morals are relative to cultures and individuals. The same activity can have different moral values depending on a particular society, culture or persons. For instance, many people in the Western world consider killing to be bad. But are all instances of killing bad? Is it morally right to kill a killer? For one with objectivism beliefs, all killings are bad versus one with relativism beliefs would say “let us look at the entire

James Rachels claims that morality is absolute. In his article Mortality is Not Relative, he discusses the fallacies of Cultural Relativism as well as the Cultural Differences Argument. Rachels believes that all cultures have some values in common and that there is way less disagreement between them than it seems. He brings up the example of the Eskimo’s and how they choose to kill the infants that they cannot take care of, “The Eskimo’s values are not all that different from our values. It is only that life forces upon them choices that we do not have to make” (Rachels). Another example of this would be how in some cultures it is wrong to eat cows because they believe that the souls of their ancestors and deceased are reincarnated into the cow. In our culture we would not eat our grandparents either, the only difference is we do not believe that they become cows, thus we would have no problem eating cows. “Now do we want to say that their values are different than ours? No, the difference lies elsewhere. The difference is in our belief systems, not in our values” (Rachels).

Who has determined these set of morals and that they are the right way of living? People are going to do what makes them happy. If believing in morals and having faith make a person feel better and in turn they live a happy life.

This movie demonstrated how much religion is a human construct. Kumare made his own religion by incorporating elements from other religions and coming up with his own elements. His religion, however, had no power without his followers who gave life to his teachings and ideas. The community gave life to a religion that would have been powerless with the social construct provided by the community. When Vikram was young, he would watch his grandmother praying and as an adult, he wondered if his made up religion could provide people with that same peace. He incorporated meditation, specifically his trademark blue light meditation, and his own form of yoga. He initially brought his community together in the yoga studio, but he slowly expanded the places they went and he helped them build strong bonds during their rituals.

David Chidester defines religion as the ways of being a human person in a human place. He further goes on to describe it as “the practices and discourses that negotiate what it is to be human in person in relation to the superhuman or in relation to whatever might be treated as subhuman” (Chidester). As such religion can be said to encompass the beliefs customs and even the cultures of the people. It defines and shapes the human out view to life and how they relate to each other based on the morals and ethical guidelines outlined in the various doctrines governing the religions. Over the years, religion has been interpreted from different perspectives. Over time in history, religion was directly intertwined with the activities and the lives of the people. For instance, where the people practiced farming, they had deities or gods which were thought to control and protect the seasons which were an integral part of the farming activities. The same case applied to those who practiced pastoralism activities. In all aspects, the religion was in tandem with their activities.

The Rachels and Vuletic all conclude that morality is independent of religion. From the Vuletic article it stated, “The only reason I can fathom for why believers might think transcendental moral facts are better explained by theism than by atheism is because--speaking from personal experience as a former Christian--believers have been psychologically conditioned to feel that a complete explanation has been offered for anything and everything whenever someone says the word "God.” I agree with this statement. I do not believe that morality is dependent on religion. I believe that the only reason why people believe this is because believing in God allows them to follow what he stands for. I do not believe that God or even “God’s laws” can be followed by everyone and demonstrate what is right from wrong. Even though I am not a religious person, I can see why this would make life easier. Your views are justified by God, because you are follows the beliefs of God.

I've always debated using reason, using the "way things really are." However, I have undergone, a major shift in perspective; no, not to religion, for that belongs to the same species of thought as naturalism, just with different specifics. Indeed, I cannot argue that what I say here is the way things "really" are, because my words are like the pointing finger; the thing being pointed at is beyond the limits of language and representational thought.

These arguments were made by fictional Ima Relativist created by Harry Gensler. Ima Relativist believes that morality is about objective facts. There is more to these arguments that once they are well analyzed they are read differently with another meaning to them. These arguments are against objective values. “Since morality is a product of culture, there can’t be objective moral truths” (Shafer-Landau, P. 205). The problem with this quote is that what a culture produces can express truths about how people live. Everything we say and do is based off our culture and what we were taught to do, yet some express objective truths.

There is a strong Christian stance against humanism because humanists believe things that go against Christian beliefs such as their beliefs that God’s existence cannot be proved, people are thrown into this life without meaning except for the meaning they make for themselves, and that there is no God. As Christians, we know that God exists and could be proved through our faith and personal relationship with Him. We also believe that God knew us by name and knew our purpose even before we were born because Jeremiah 1:5 states, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” meaning that we as Christians have a purpose in this life.

Religion and religious traditions both have ethical beliefs as a common set. Meaning, they have moral meanings and understandings. They don't actually measure the same set of ethics, however, many religions have some set of ethics and they believe that those particular ethics are mandated by some supernatural forces. For instance, Christianity have 10 commandments.

There has been a clash between secular thought and religion since its formation of societies in the classical age. Both have made an equal effect on the culture of each empire by influencing people to change their belief on the world. Major religions have made interactions, which affected some of their ideas for what they have become now. The major religions during the classical age are Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism, Jainism, Daoism, and Zoroastrianism. These religions also have similarities and differences between each other in which it has involved them to what they've become. The major empires that have affected are Persia, India, China, Greece, and Rome. These empires' culture has influenced by religion to the

In this report I will be comparing and contrasting the similarities and differences between the religious tradition Christianity, with the world view of Secular Humanism.

No matter what culture you are apart of, or where you live, or what you believe, there is one underlying factor to which every human makes their everyday decisions in life: morality. A moral is defined as concerning or relating to what is right and wrong in human behavior. Many philosophers have argued and debated about moral subjectivity and objectivity from the start of philosophy. However, I will focus in on and agree with one particular philosopher, J.L. Mackie, and his argument on the existence of subjective moral value.

Many people ask why morals should be able to prevail over people's desires. This is a valid question, one that must be answered if morals are to be defended. Morals must not only be reasonable for people to follow, but they must also have good reasons for people to follow them, otherwise people would not bother adhering to them. These reasons should motivate people to follow these rules. They must appeal to their perceived interests, but if these rules are to apply to all people, they cannot serve the interests of just a few people. Moral rules are not for imposing your own values and tastes on other people! As Narveson puts it, "[w]hat matters for morals is that its rules are individually reasonable for people to accept and to follow, so long as others do too" (MM, 16).