Humanism vs Atheism (Philosophical Distinction)
Vložit
- čas přidán 18. 05. 2024
- An explanation of the difference between Humanism and Atheism, as well as some organizations that support these communities. Also included are brief explanations of Nihilism and Anti-Nihilism.
Sponsors: NBA_Ruby, Antybodi, Federico Galvão, Mike Gloudemans, Andy Capone, Andreas Froestl, The Jack Bancroft, Jakey, Andrew Sullivan, Eugene SY, Tyler James, Antoinemp1, Dennis Sexton, Joao Sa, Joshua Furman, SirSpammenot Multitude, Ploney, Avatar, Diéssica, GhostlyYorick, Hendrick McDonald, horace chan, Will DeRousse, Star Gazer, Paul Linkogle, Julian Seidl, Doǧan Çetin, Thomas Kristic, Panos Tsivi, Jesse Willette and Daniel West. Thanks for your support on Patreon! If you want to become a patron, follow this link: / carneades
Here are some videos you might enjoy:
The 100 Days of Logic ( • 100 Days of Logic (Full) )
History of Philosophy ( • Four Weeks of Famous P... )
Ancient Philosophers & Zeno’s Paradoxes ( • Schools of Ancient Gre... )
ExPhi Experimental Philosophy ( / @experimentalphilosoph... )
Map of Philosophy ( • The Map Of Philosophy )
More videos with Carneades ( / @carneadesofcyrene )
Philosophy by Topic:
Epistemology: • Epistemology
Metaphysics: • Metaphysics
Political Philosophy: • Political Philosophy
Philosophy of Religion: • Philosophy of Religion
Ancient Philosophy: • Ancient Philosophy
Philosophy of Science: • Philosophy of Science
Philosophy of Language: • Philosophy of Language
Philosophy of Art/Aesthetics: • Philosophy of Art (Aes...
Buy stuff with Zazzle: www.zazzle.com/store/carneade...
Follow us on Twitter: @CarneadesCyrene / carneadescyrene
Information for this video gathered from The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, The Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, The Collier-MacMillan Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the Dictionary of Continental Philosophy, and more! (#athiesm #humanism)
Yeah, I am Humanist who is an Atheist - but also atheist because of humanism. There are forms of being as human that can be ethical in nature that allows you to care others and not outright harm others - no need for god(s) for that. Great video and love this clarification.
Hey carneades, I just started watching you again. I just wanted to know what do you think is the best position on epistemology? Like for example coherentism,foundationalism,reliabiliam, etc. Or should I become a skeptic?
hi, how about Madhyamaka? i.e nothing is substantiated yet everything exists in dependence
Can you go more into detail about "Humanist Theist/Theistic Humanist"?
I'm agnostic with respect to the proposition of God's existence, and I don't generally think that God's existence is relevant to ethics, but I am also generally doubtful of whether or not people can be good or bad anyways. At least not good or bad in a universal sense. My intuitions lean a little towards the non-cognitivist side of things I guess.
Can a non-cognitivist be a humanist? Or are all non-theistic non-cognitivists nihilists?
Humanism, whether atheistic or agnostic, is grounded in the value of human life and the potential for reason and empathy to guide ethical behaviour.
It addresses the nihilistic challenge by focusing on the practical and experiential foundations of ethical values. While acknowledging the lack of objective moral grounding, humanism argues that morality can be based on shared human experiences, reason, and empathy. These values derive significance from their ability to enhance well-being, promote flourishing, and reduce suffering (which is anti-Nietzsche, but a set of values we can still deal with.) By prioritising human dignity, compassion, and rational discourse, humanism offers a pragmatic approach to ethics that remains relevant.
Non-cognitivists can align with humanism by focusing on practical outcomes and shared goals of improving human well-being. Ultimately, it's about recognising our shared humanity and the profound responsibility we have to each other-like fish in water, we often overlook the importance of kindness, understanding, and everyday choices that shape our world. These are still the waters that we swim in.
@@CatchMeUp What a pleasantly well written response. Thank you.
Gratis info. Thank CZcams.
One only requires the motive to be so-called good or bad!! Its a choice motivated by circumstances!!
how would Pyrrhonean scepticism deal with the statement that "Pyrrhonean scepticism exists?"
I want to relate a story that actually happened to me several years ago. It is a little long, but it is an incredible story. I am a Christian and would be interested in your opinion as an atheist as to how this happened.
It was a very hot summer day; nearly one hundred degrees. My daughter and I took My son to a park where he was playing a soccer double-header. Two back-to-back games in extreme heat. Shortly before the end of the first game, my son ran out of Gatorade. He was borrowing sips from his teammates. (This was obviously pre-covid) At the end of the 2nd game he was "dying of thirst." I said, "Son I'll drive to the 7-11 down the street and get you a Gatorade. As we were pulling on to the freeway onramp, he said, "Dad, I thought you were going to get me some Gatorade." "I'm sorry, I forgot. I'll get off at the next offramp and get you some." As we were passing that offramp, someone in the car said, "I thought you were going to get off and get some Gatorade?" We kept passing offramps and remembering AFTER passing each one but could not remember in time to get off. We did that for seventeen miles. Finally, we pulled into our neighborhood, and I said, "I'm sorry son, we'll get you something to drink at home."
As I turned down the first street, I noticed a car up ahead, backing out of a driveway. He was about to run over a "Big Wheel." I little kids toy bike. It had two little wheels in the back and a big wheel in the front. There was no kid on the Big Wheel, so I didn't think much of it, UNTIL I noticed a small child UNDER the car about to be run over. I simultaneously, slammed on the brakes, ripped the door open and screamed as LOUD as I possibly could, "STOP, STOP, STOP." The driver heard my frantic screaming and stopped the car. I ran over to help the little kid. He was face down. The car had LITERALLY stopped two inches from his little head. He was perfectly lined up for the car to run over his head, then his neck and then his spine...
If we had just arrived at that time, you could say, "WOW! What a coincidence!" But that does NOT explain how we absolutely could not REMEMBER to get off at seventeen miles of offramps UNTIL we passed each one of them.
I believe God had different plans other than a senseless death at that tender age for the little kid, and along the way He bolstered our faith in Him.
You might say, "What about other kids who did get run over, or what about kids born with this or that disease. Why didn't God spare them?" God is God. He is All-knowing and All-powerful He does His will. AND He is infinitely more intelligent than we are. In this life we very well may not understand why things happen as they do, but God knows, and we just have to realize He still sits on the Throne and one day will rectify all the problems we face here on this sinful earth.
I just wanted to share with you my story. When I was 12 years old, my father called my Stepmother and told us to meet him at Disney Land. We met up with dad and had spent most of the day at Disney Land in Anaheim California, riding rides and seeing activities. To cut to the chase, my father left in one car and my Stepmother and I left in another. We followed dad to a gas station to fill up both cars. Dad pulled out of the gas station first and than we tried to follow, somehow got separated We spent about 2 1/2 hours looking for dad, driving back and forth from the gas station to various turn offs. Eventually my Stepmother said, we are just going to have to drive home and hope your father is there. It took about 11 hours to get home. When we arrived we saw the building next to our house smoldering. The neighbors told us the building, a scuba diving shop, had blown up.
Had my Stepmother and I followed my father back to our home that day, like we planed, I might not be alive today because I constantly played with neighborhood kids in the parking lot daily that was next door to our home.
Feuerbach is a example of humanist that claims a humanism as anthropoteism: putting human being as a divine being.
humanism in reality looks like a religion itself with all its dogmas
Where would an emotivist fit in your opinion? To my mind someone who doesn't think good exists beyond an emotive sense, doesn't necessarily have to be a nihilist. Or do you think moral nihilism is the only alternative?
Fist, because english is not my native language I might have slipped some wrong wording or grammatical mistakes. 😶
Where is gone critical Carneades? Humanism also puts emphasis on the concept of "Human", particularly on who is deemed to be "Human" enough through some ingroup bias, mostly political, cultural and religious. Thus it led historically to dehumanization of the other, not "Human" enough to be considered worth of morality, conducted mass slavery, colonial & genocidal endeavor, eugenism & segregationism and even antisemitism in the name of Humanity's sake. Humanism main flaw resides in the concept of human itself, in order to protect the one/good/true moral "Human" against the disposable/bad/false immoral "Inhuman".
At the core, both atheistics and theistics Humanist will claim to be (mainly as a group) the most moral or some kind of universalized morality. But viewed from Sirius, humanism appears to be a deep rationalization framed by secularized societies, from "civilized" people mildly hidding a complex of superiority.
"...admit of multiple definitions..." So, what is the word? They are polysemous ?
Yes. Exactly. One of the first lines in the SEP's entry on Atheism and Agnosticism: "The word “atheism” is polysemous-it has multiple related meanings. "
I'm a gnostic atheist when it comes to christianity as it is generally presented (i.e. I know that the christian god as presented in the bible and by modern teachings is impossible) (there's a decent chance other religions, especially ones closely related to Christianity, such as Islam, Judaism, and Mormonism, would fall in the same category if I'd take the time to get to know them better)
I'm a pure agnostic in general (I do not know whether or not a god exists and I do not take a position as to whether one does or not)
I'm a humanist, in that I believe morality/ethics can exist and be followed regardless of whether a god exists. I even take it a step further and take issue with the notion that morality would come from a god, as that would mean that morality isn't a constant but rather something at the whim of some higher being, and I also take issue with the idea of a god or higher being able to be regarded as (perfectly) good or evil if they are the source of morality, as that goes into circular reasoning.
Wow the trend continues, literally every agnostic I encounter or hear about is just a massive cuck for religious people, congrats, you and aldos Huxley can go to hell (or can you? I don’t know?).
The only intelligent person I know who’s ever claimed to be an agnostic is Bob chipman, and that was years ago, he may have finally made the ascent into atheism.
Shouldn’t the deist position be different than the theist? If you are a deist, you aren’t a theist. The concept of belief of a god existing is there, but divine intervention is the difference. It’s a rather huge one. I would think that a deist and theist should be in the same circle when over lapping others about morality.
Well I would agree that a deist's position should be different than that of a theist for the reason you outline in your comment. DI is a massive difference.
That being said - this video was clearly a simplification to illustrate a venn diagram which showed how humanist and anti-humanist would overlap with one who lacks a belief in God and one who believes in God. So I think in that sense the venn diagram makes sense. A deist could be both humanist or anti-humanist, depending on how they conceive of God, and what kind of world they believe said God 'created'.
I would be willing to argue though that I think it more likely a deist would be humanist than anti-humanist.
The word God carries way too much weight, God doesn’t want us to worry so much about labels.
You speak for god?
God wants us to be found in Christ. Meaning, are we totally trusting in Jesus Christ for our salvation.
Except when He does.
it were the Abrahamic religions that made society so obsessed with god, it's an illness
God is not needed for driving a system of ethics. Ethics can be derived from facts about the world - facts like: people have unique sets of desires, in the short run resources are limited, one person's actions can affect other people, and so on.
When God is used for ethics, ethics becomes a decree rather than something that is derived from math and logic
I'm really confused because I believe that humans have a value, I seriously doubt the existence of gods, I believe that there can be a morality without gods, but historically, humanity has been atrocious to itself and will never change, so I consider myself a nihilist. 🤷
Interesting view. You think that morality does exist, but people are inherently evil? I am not sure. I suspect that there are a lot of people in history that have done good, just as there are many who have done evil. Even if there will always be people who do evil, it does not mean that there won't also always be people who do good.
As an atheist, I have to say that defining atheism as a lack of belief is plainly silly. Theism is not defined in terms of lacking belief, and neither should atheism. Does god exist? Either it does or it doesn't. Fence sitters are neither theists nor atheists.
Even etymologically speaking, it comes from the ancient Greek term “atheos” which means without god, not without belief in god. It literally means a view of reality that doesn't contain gods.
Atheist philosophers in academia don't use the “lack of belief” definition, as it makes no sense to define it that way.