Good without God: What do you think of humanism?
“Atheism alone, as the rejection of gods and the supernatural, cannot meet our deepest human needs for connection and inspiration,” writes Greg Epstein in his just-released book, "Good without God: What a Billion Nonreligious People Believe." (He's in the photo at right.)
Epstein is the Humanist Chaplain at Harvard University. This chaplaincy “is dedicated to building, educating, and nurturing a diverse community of humanists, agnostics, atheists, and the non-religious at Harvard and beyond,” according to the organization’s web site.
Defining humanism is a tall order. Here’s a short video clip of Epstein, providing his definition—one that he sums up in three words: Good without God.
Part of his mission is to define what humanism is, not what it’s against. Humanists often debate the existence of God, when he says they should be focusing on the concrete alternatives to religious belief and practice.
These practices often mirror religious practices. He promotes secular celebrations of the major moments in life, such as “baby naming ceremonies” that involve friends and family. Others choose “welcoming ceremonies” as another alternative.
An alternative to choosing “godparents,” he says, should be a public ceremony for choosing and naming “guide parents.”
Secular wedding ceremonies are another obvious alternative to a religious wedding. “After the vows are exchanged,” he writes, “I think it’s good to ask those in attendance to answer a question: do you, this couple’s family and friends, promise to encourage and support them in creating a strong and vital marriage? The answer is always ‘We do’.”
What do you think of Epstein’s advice?
Is humanism a reasonable alternative to traditional religious beliefs and practices?
What secular practices do you engage in, if any?
PLEASE, Add a Comment
Comments
Add a Comment
See All Comments
I don't oppose healthcare reform that includes funding for abortion. It is individual choice here, in my belief, and a person can choose to use health insurance to pay for the abortion or not use it.
The costs of doing nothing? If the Government can't do something about it than that's the final answer? Seriously?
We, as the People have the most power. Why are we so afraid to use it? I think it is a shame that someone would have to pay $900/ month for medical insurance, but how is that the Government's problem? If you want to start with a basic problem, let's talk about these Attorney commercials about every disease on T.V. all day long. Hmm...Do you think these lawsuits drive up the cost of insurance? Look what John Edward's single handedly did to Obstitricians in this country. "Put on your big girl panties and get over it!" Stop being victims, start shopping around and start saying NO we aren't going to take this kind of treatment anymore! Don't sit on your laurels and expect the government to fix your problems.
Stop beating up President Obama over the "health care" problem in this do nothing nation. I have been a nurse for also 30 years now and many ,many others know that the problem was there before he was elected to the White House. Stop! blameing President Obama and take your medication and stand up for your health care coverge.
The Republicans and the Democrats are on a "national health care coverage plan" and we the taxpayers paid their bills. They do not want paytaxers to get the same coverage they take for grant. Take your medication and stand up for yourself.
We cannot continue to blame Obama for everything that ills us as a "do nothing" nation.
I would like to have the public option, I used to do billing for a doctor's office/clinic. I definitely want a bill passed for health care-can't leave it the way it is.
Passing health care is absolutely essential for the future of our country--for our national values that have historically ensured a safety net--from social security on. And for our economic security it is also vital since the projected result with the status quo is not financially sustainable. We absolutely must pass health care.
If the deciding vote was in my hand, I would tell Obama Inc to add a robust public option and I will vote for the bill.
Saying the healthcare vote is PO's entire presidency is like awarding the Nobel Prize to someone in office for 2 weeks; it is a little early for that.
There is a lot to come yet. Unemployment crisis is going to continue to grow for the next 6 months, maybe next year that will break. Iran has the bomb, the real N-word. Somebody in that region is going to do something stupid, whether it is A-stan, P-stan, India, Iran/q, Israel, I don't know, but someone is going to do something stupid.
There will be bigger things to define PO's presidency before the next election. His ability to twist people's arms isn't what I'll measure him on.
It is hard to imagine how our politics could get worse but I believe Reed will probably find a way. After all he is one of the original christian hate mongers.
Excuse me, Obama a liberal? Not! He is a right-of-center politician who has been branded a liberal by faux news. Look at his policies. The treasury department came directly from wall street and the fed. His justice department refuses to prosecute war criminals, and he is in the process of a give away to the health insurance industry that would have made W proud.
The US Constitution guarantees us freedom of religion. I wish they had been smart enough to include freedom FROM religion. We talk about how there is separation of church and state, to which I say, baloney. If there was separation of church and state you wouldn't be asking today's question - what do I think of this particular new guy with a religious agenda.
May answer to that question should be clear... I am opposed to him, as I would be opposed to any him or her candidate who thinks it necessary to stand on the steps of a church, any church, to run for office.
We just can't seem to grow out of those bible thumping religious zealots who came here from Europe and started the genocide of the Native Peoples, can we? Those were "Pilgrims", but still zealots. Religon has NO place in politics, if we have separation of church and state. From where I sit, its obvious we don't.
Ahhh Dr Baker like a good lawyer (or in your case a good social scientist) you ask a question that you already know the answer to. I say that because based on the empirical research presented in your 2007 book: America's Crisis of Values: Reality and Perception we (Dems and Reps) at our core are not so different. Prior to reading it I thought I was TOTALLY different than THEM. But what I had to admit, was that in general we are very similar. I would like to tell you that since reading it I have had more patience in dealing with the game of politics. Or that I could laugh at the childish pronouncements from both sides attempting to convince the constituencies about how different WE are from THEM. Actually it frustrates me immensely to see what I believe is a deliberate attempt to polarize our nation for the self serving aggrandizement of "the party". I often feel helplessly incapable of attempting to deal with such vitriol. And yet in my, some say naive optimistic way, I can only hope that if we continue to dialogue, we will continue to see how much we are alike as opposed to how much we are different. Thank you for your efforts to encourage that with this blog.
Yes, I am fed up with the gridlock in Washington. I am also fed up with all the amendments and riders that wind up being attahced to bills.
If, as you suggest, the Ds & Rs are now polar opposites and there is no centrist party, then we need more political parties. Italy, for one extreme, has about 20.
There does exist other parties, but the political machines have made certain people don't understand that. If someone goes in and punches or pushes a party name, and then pushes a candidate within or outside that party, the entire vote is void.
Instead of letting people get elected by party name, let them get elected by reputation. End the one vote for all candidates, make people be informed to vote.
And next time, skip the Ds and the Rs. Vote for someone else, surprise them. Me? I vote libertarian or egalitarian (if any are running) and always NO on anything that raises taxes.
Perhaps there was a day when the Democrats really stood with the people, but that ended with Jimmy Carter. Now they have both sold out to Wall Street and corporate greed. I'm a retired financial advisor and I won't put our money back into the market until Glass Steagll is re-instated. I've never been angrier at my government, even during Vietnam, than I am now.
Why do we put up with it? Just heard the term 'Stockholm syndrome' used to describe the American people still siding with the crooks. works for me
We should all be used to the "blame the victim" mentality of the Republicans by now, but the unmitigated gall continues to astound me. People are out of work and hurting because of 30 years of Republican policies --- and now when those policies nearly bring down the entire country the perpetrators continue to prate about deadbeats and "let them eat cake." I never get it that this is what they do best and they never stop. So every time I am just amazed and dumbfounded and disheartened. They never learn, but apparently I don't either!
There's a fascinating new book out - haven't bought/read it yet but browsed it in Borders. One of the chapters explains how God implemented and loves the Free Market System. They see Him as the Ultmiate Entrepreneur cuz he created the Universe or some such BS.
Add a Comment
See All Comments