HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Apr. 26, 2005
Mr. Keyes does not accept the above; here are some arguments in favor, coming from a secular humanist. First, I very strongly believe in the rigid separation of church and state – history teaches this very clearly, “when religion and government ride in the same boat ... [watch out!/danger Will Robinson!]”. Separation, properly implemented, ensures the protection of minority religious views, and protects institutions such as science from supernatural bias. However, I would never deny someone else their right to believe as they see fit. After all, I might be wrong about my view of the universe. As long as the playing field is even, so be it – as long as we have sites like this where the religionists can throw balls at the secularists and vice versa, I'm happy. I enjoy the right to throw balls and to be hit as well. I'm sure enough about my views that I will fight for them, and I am glad to be able to do this on a mostly even playing-field (whether or not the playing field is truly even is another article, but I believe in the principle of an even playing field). And, of course, forced belief invariably leads to suffering. Take a gander at Russia – the Soviets smeared the thinnest layer of forced atheism onto their society, and what was the result? Did we get generations of self-perpetuating atheists? No. As a matter of fact, right now, Russia has an “official” state religion – a bad move, but I guess the pendulum needs to swing the other direction for a while. If wide-spread atheism was a Soviet goal, they blew it by forcing it onto their people. Second, of course we need a free press. Without a free press, how can we ever know the truth that Mr. Keyes so admires? Sure, we can be mislead – take FOX “News” for example! But with a free press, there is at least the chance of truth. What is the alternative? Third, of course we need freedom of speech! The last two arguments overlap - if speech isn't free, then we have no stand against those in charge doing the speaking (whether they are wrong or right, whatever “right” means). Further, we need to sometimes believe and do that which is wrong, in order to learn that it's wrong. This kind of experimentation wrings out truth from fiction. Fourth, there hasn't been a serious study of which I'm aware to date which show serious differences in the races as it pertains to ability. We should all know by now that the early “studies” which attempted to show that the brains of blacks are smaller lack scientific integrity. Going on genetics, if we randomly pluck three people from America, two black and one white, chances are that one black and the white will be closer genetically than the two blacks. Even determining race is problematic at best at times. However, lets take one example, “Asians are better at math”. Why? Genetics? Society? Culture? It may be that race alone plays a factor, or, not. Have they studied Asians raised in Latino homes and compared the math test results? We simply don't have the science yet to determine these types of generalities. The Japanese tend to live longer too – perhaps fish oil improves not only life, but math skills as well? Maybe both are because they tend to be non-Christian? Who knows? But lets assume for the sake of argument that Asians are better at math. What then? Do we prefer Asian scholarships to MIT over blacks? This would be a mistake, because it ignores the difference between potential and individuality. Most people go through significant portions of their lives without knowing just what they want to be when they grow up – I know I fit that category! A black student, while potentially more incompetent at math, might run circles around an Asian student that prefers to make clay sculpture. Again, we do not have the technology yet to determine what someone really wants and how they will perform. Fifth, ditto for the sexes. Lets assume that males make better managers. What if Johnny doesn't want to be a manager, and therefore, highly motivated Jane functions much better in that department? Sixth, of course we need morality. We need a set of rules to prevent chaos. Only civilizations can produce space programs, for example – this takes thousands of separate entities, from corporations, to universities, to federally funded programs, to make any headway. As I try to explain in my recent article about space, this may well be a desirable goal for humanity in the very near future. For society to function, we need a set of rules, both laws and morals (little rules without direct legal consequences), and our survival probably depends on this grand, non-chaotic, cooperation. These rules need not be supernatural in origin – look up the “humanist manifesto”. If we take the biological bonds between family members, add in the bond between mates, and multiply the needs of the greater society such that the needs of those bonded individuals remain “happy”, morality/society springs forth on it's own. This is true even in chimp societies. Whether or not doing a “good deed” is ultimately altruistic is a different discussion (even if being “nice” helps someone, would we do it if it didn't make us feel good?) – the foundations of morality and society nevertheless seem to be natural. I would agree, however, that relative morality is a truth; drug induced orgies which involve sex with what we could consider minors work well for some Amazon tribes – for them, it's not immoral – it bonds them and prepares them for the hunt. The same activity in an American Jr. High before a football game might well be immoral. Both views are correct, given their relevant societies. The very definition of humanism is the antithesis of, “ we don't need morals”. Democracy with free speech is a mess, to be sure, but as many folks much smarter than I have agreed; it's the best system that we know. And by and large, it seems to work – real world experiments in democracy are successes for the most part. ------------ About the author Frederick Smith: I enjoy writing about the positive virtues of humanism - humanists are the good guys. Email: dahlek65@yahoo.com Tell a friend about this site! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com. Please link to this article rather than copying and pasting it onto your site (which would be unauthorized and illegal). |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
