h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Right, I am speaking from a largely uninformed viewpoint but still, just to ask, what about Humanism, where does it fit in (if at all) I don't classify my beliefs, but they follow a somewhat troubled and twisted path, basically, I cannot discount the existance of a god, but I also do not believe that he is all knowing, all seeing and all powerful (If nothing else, all powerful is logically impossable through teh heavy rock argument) I also don't believe he's alone. I think that if tehr eis a god, He is part of a species, who may or may not know taht tehy are influencing our dimension/universe/galaxy/planet he is mortal, as nothing lastas for ever, and he probably hasd gods of his own, thsi idea replicates to infinity. Ultimately, it means I see no need to worship any supreme being because they will always answer to someone. Ultimately, if god exisits, in my mind he's a flawed mortal, like teh rest of us. So, that has some relevance, I don't know hwat but there you go.

Religions come equipped with a moral system that reflects the desires/whims of their particular gods. When you gravitate towards agnosticism or atheism, you find yourself without a moral structure. This is where Secular Humanism comes into play. And if you ask me, basing your morality on the observable and palpable effects they have on humanity is infintely more sensible to basing it on a fictitious or unknowable character.

Indeed. Also, not to sound like I'm digging at any religions organised or otehrwise, There have never (As far as I know) been any humanist holy wars.

There is actually a brief but amusing entry on Isms at http://www.h2g2.com/A199370 . And there is an entry on Maslow's Humanistic Theory at http://www.h2g2.com/A147151 .

Anyway, humanism and agnosticism are very compatible with one another. Generally speaking, a humanist agnostic believes in the power of humanity to solve our problems -- whilst remaining uncertain about whether a god-like being has anything to do with that power.

Just as many Eastern belief systems (Taoism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Zen, and so on) are considered compatible with one another, agnosticism is compatible with any number of secular belief systems. As long as your beliefs don't directly contradict one another, you can safely be whatever you like and still remain agnostic.

Just don't ask me to explain what a Liberal Socialist Minimalist Idealist Humanistic Agnostic is.

While I was living with a devout christian, who rather annoyingly tried to convert me every few days, I actually named my own religion, But I forgot it. Basically, I decided to try to convert her to agnosticism, for a laugh. Almost managed by bringing up bible innacuracys too. But there you go, always easyer to destableise a belief system than it is to establish one.

Not really... I've never heard of an example of a religion dying out through non-belief... whereas there are lots of examples of people inventing religion-like cults and followings...

It's a lot easier to get most people to believe something than it is to get 'em to stop believing in it afterwards, methinks.

26199

how about the roman gods?

Yup, and while systems don't die out they do fragment (Admitteldy non-belief is not always teh cause and thsi coudl be classed as establishing new systems) but I always notcie that its better to present people with "Facts". Alot of christians I know treat teh bible as a record of events of teh time, and hence a proof. In that respect I often find people who study physics to have more faith in teh theories behind their science. For example, If I read a true and balanced account of the falklands war, just describing the events that occured, It woudl require very little faith. On teh otehr hand, the theory of human evolution is still questionable. and tehrefore requires more faith to believe in.

An American Indian can tell you of numerous gods and spirits that are no longer worshipped, as the tribe that worshipped them died out or was annihilated long ago.

My point exactly (honest )...

Seems to me the romans died out, as did the tribes you speak of, Fragilis... the only way to kill a religion is by eliminating the people who believe in it, pretty much. Simply asking 'em not to believe is considerably less likely to work...

26199

Rather alomg teh theory in multipel books that the only way to kill a god is to stop everyone believing in him. Anyone read Hogfather? (Ok, santa's not a god but the theory's sound)

> Anyone read Hogfather
Yes, but Small Gods is rather more relevant to the discussion. The whole Pratchett grounding that gods are created by the people who believe in them and have power in relation to the number of believers they have (while divorcing belief from religion), is a marvellous bit of Discworld logic. And who says it isn't true?




Phil

To me it makes more sense. Of course, it means that gods couldn't have created us, unless tehy were first believed in by someone else.

Perhaps they believed in each other?
Or maybe creating a universe takes less effort than you'd expect?

*rolls up sleeves*

Neat, we coudl creat universes, then we would be gods, but then who believed in us? Unless its that teambuilding "Believe in yourself" stuff.

>the only way to kill a religion is by eliminating the people who believe in it, pretty much<

Ahum. Coming from a culture (Norwegian, you know, those pesky vikings...) whose religion is dead, I don't agree with the above hypothesis.. Allthough the nice christians did kill all those who refused to worship Jesus (know as White Christ to the people of that place, that time), many continued to honor the old gods as well. A while. Until it became unpopular to do so. To much hassle, and not much good coming of it really. Still, us norwegians are still alive and kicking, as a people and as a nation.

But I'm entering this rather late. Just ignore my ramblings, they have no consequence any way...

No you have a point. Kill, convert or disinterest those people.

Incidentally. I heard rumours that worship of the old Norse gods was beginning to resurface. or is that just crazy talking.

Well, there's the Odinist. They're crazy people who combines Satanism, old norse gods and nationalism (or was it nazism, I'm unsure). Pretty violent and unwholesome characters.
There is also the Åsa-belivers. They are nicer people, honoring the old norse gods and fighting for the equality of all religions. I don't think they are too many, though. Their norwegian organisation numbers 80 members. Still, they trow good parties. (Or was it sacred rites... )
Now is a good time for all old and lets-pretend-its-old religions. Wicca, shamanism, druidism, asatru etc. is blooming. I guess it's allright. Most of those people are pretty nice all around...

Yes, i have noticed that more people seem to be taking up old religions. In my experience though, you get very few who actually believe in them. Alot of people just think its cool to say, "I'm a satanist" or "i'm a druid" "I'm a pagan" To me this is disrespectful to those who actually do practice those religions. If you don't actually believe in anything I feel you should just say so. it doesn't always attract religions who are recruiting. (Thats actaully a lie. Fro some reason everyone thinks that when you are agnostic or humanistic you're ripe for conversion)

Well, Satanism doesn't require belief in anything supernatural, so don't complain too much...

There's a distinction between practicing a religion and believing in it - one can pray and go to church and still not believe in jehovah. Heck, many people do that for some time before deconverting - hoping the faith will come back.

I suspect that the majority of people who say "I am a xxxxist" do practice the religion they claim to, albeit possibly in a small way. Is this not enough?