In this reblogged post, the question: Is secular humanism a religion?, is taken up. Perhaps for many folks secular humanism and scientism are substitutes for bona fide religion in their lives. As well, we can clearly see that “progressive” ideology is a substitute for religion in the lives of hundreds of millions in Western nations across the globe. (We see this every single day in the painfully paradoxical, progressive paradise known as San Francisco.)
It is now a rather old story: secular humanism is a religion. A court case in 1995 examined the issue and concluded, rightly, that science, in the form of the theory of evolution, is not a religion. In 2006, the BBC aired a program called The Trouble with Atheismwhichargued that atheists are religious and made the point via a series of interviews with prominent atheists who claimed their beliefs were “proved” by science. The presenter, Rod Liddle, concluded that Darwinism is a religion. That is wrong, as 18th century philosopher David Hume showed many years ago. Science consists of facts, but facts alone do not motivate. Without motive, a fact points to no action. Liddle was half-right: both religion and secular humanism provide motives, explicit in one case, but covert in the other.
What is religion? All religions…
View original post 1,140 more words