What is your opinion of the label "Secular Humanist"?
Asked by
Rsam (
586
)
July 12th, 2009
i tend to think this self-categorization is highly unnecessary and only playing into the religionist’s claims that non-religionists (atheist, non-believers, whathaveyou) are in fact themselves a sort of religion with their own belief system, and thus essentially the same as the religionist.
for myself, i am plainly atheist and as part of my atheism tend to reject any and all “systems” of (un)belief under the principal that i have no need for such a “system”—-i like being able to determine my mores on my own, without “guidance” from an organized force.
So, if you use the SH term i’d ask “why do you think its even necessary, if essentially you are just a non-religionists?; If asked ‘what are you’, couldnt you just as well say, ‘im not anything – i just like life’”?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
26 Answers
I don’t think it was necessary to make such a classification for non religious people who believe in science but we sure do love to categorize things so of course we have to have a name for it.
If you read up on secular humanism, you will see that it is an espousal of a particular set of tenets and principles.
Just because you have made the choice you have, does not mean that is the right choice for others.
I ask, again, why do you care what others believe or call themselves?
I don’t think the use of the label supports religion, it only provides another option…I have no negative or positive feelings about the phrase
I don’t think it’s a religion at all, just a group of like-minded people. They do have a set of standards, and not all atheists would agree with their standards.
I think it’s fine for those who want to use it, unnecessary for those who don’t. Some people wear labels like a clan tartan, so the folks in their crew will know them.
To me, it seems like a way for atheists to avoid calling themselves atheists. But whatever.
@Ivan I disagree. One can be both an atheist and a Secular Humanist. They are neither mutually exclusive nor one and the same.
@augustlan
I know that. Secular humanists are atheists. I mean that, if someone were to ask a secular humanist what their religious convictions were, they wouldn’t have to say “atheist”.
I follow secularism religiously.
@Ivan you seem to think that atheist, as a term, is loaded for ALL people…it is not…secular humanists don’t have to be avoiding the term just because you think that that term is somehow controversial…
@Ivan My literary friend has put an unerring finger on the point. The only people wo think there is a scarlet letter A for atheist are not atheists!!!! That is why this whole Fluther atheism discussion is so weird.
@Simone_De_Beauvoir
Of course not. The term doesn’t have to be controversial to all people in order for people to want to avoid using it.
@Ivan no i mean it isn’t something to avoid for secular humanists…it just means nothing to them…or they feel it doesnt apply…that is not avoiding it
I’m not saying that the secular humanists are uncomfortable with the word, I’m saying that they know other people are uncomfortable with the word, and thus they avoid using it to describe themselves. It’s the same reason why many atheists call themselves “not very religious”, “spiritual but not religious”, “freethinkers”, “brights”, “naturalists”, “secularists”, etc. They are all just euphemisms for “atheist”, but they feel more comfortable using the euphemisms in front of other people because they don’t carry the negative connotations that the word “atheist” does.
@Ivan well I understand what you’re saying but I find it difficult that ALL secular humanists do that…their focus is on humanity not on religious matters nor on gods or lack thereof
“Secular humanist” was a dog-whistle term for the Religious Right in the 1980s.
And no, “secular humanist” is not merely a euphemism for “atheist,” any more than “Roman Catholic” is a euphemism for “theist.” Yes, atheism underlies secular humanism, but there’s a lot more to the secular humanist worldview than the mere lack of belief in a God.
@cwilbur
I didn’t mean that secular humanism was simply another word of atheism, I meant that, when asked, people would much rather use the term “secular humanist” in place of the term “atheist”.
If “secular humanist” is a more accurate term, why would you not expect people to use it? Are you surprised that televangelists call themselves “Christians” and not “theists”?
The fact that it’s not a perfect synonym for atheist is why people use it.
@Ivan I’m not familiar with the term “brights” in a religious (or anti-religious) context. What is it about?
While Secular Humanism may infact be some set of standards which is set up by some cultish committee of folks, my guess (as with most religions) is that most people self-identifying as such are neither aware of most of them nor following them very well. but maybe im wrong.
@Ivan Thanks. It seems like a sort of activist group for atheists.
Answer this question 
This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.
Composing members:
0
