tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post3071517853837936962..comments2024-03-22T06:22:08.010+00:00Comments on Stephen Law: History of Humanism - for commentsStephen Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02167317543994731177noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-80125636029244387002013-01-04T12:50:52.162+00:002013-01-04T12:50:52.162+00:00Your quote "Religion is recognised by the com...Your quote "Religion is recognised by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" may not be directly from Seneca.<br />In http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Seneca_the_Younger it is suggested that the quote derives from Edward Gibbon's remark "The various modes of worship which prevailed in the Roman world were all considered by the people as equally true; by the philosopher as equally false; and by the magistrate as equally useful."<br /><br />Gordon PeckhamAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-18829788713829421622009-12-29T18:21:03.124+00:002009-12-29T18:21:03.124+00:00Humanist philosophers are fond of citing Epicurus ...Humanist philosophers are fond of citing Epicurus as an important precursor, but was he really that influential? It seems to me that the Pythagoreans with their idea that "all is number", Aristotle's formulation of logic, Euclid's axiomatisation of geometry, Archmimedes' principle of leverage, were of far more significance for the modern world, and the development of science. Beacause some of the other ideas of the Pythagoreans and Aristotle were wrong or contrary to Humanism, doesn't lessen their significance.George Jellisshttp://www.mayhematics.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-64293734674465748832009-12-23T12:55:06.966+00:002009-12-23T12:55:06.966+00:00Stephen,
Ancient Indian Thought section:
“One of...Stephen,<br /><br />Ancient Indian Thought section:<br /><br />“<b>One of the Upinashads</b>”: typo; should be <b>Upanishads</b>. More seriously, it is a bit odd to mention the relatively minor Carvaka school, but not to cover early Buddhism which is not only totally atheistic but also, unlike Carvaka, powerfully altruistic, totally oriented towards not only the individual’s desire to end suffering, but a moral requirement to ease the suffering of others too. It’s worth noting that — in the early Buddhist texts — not only are gods rejected but reincarnation in any sense of continuity of a “soul” (atman). Early Jainism was also atheistic, although it did have a concept of continuity of the soul.Stuart Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06448577864182126540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-26530090702834679492009-12-21T14:42:47.872+00:002009-12-21T14:42:47.872+00:00“sixth century BC India)” there’s no opening brack...“sixth century BC India)” there’s no opening bracket and no full stop.<br /><br />“like the philosopher Democritus, that matter was made up of invisible parts” should that be “indivisible”?<br /><br />On the conflicts between Humanism and Conservative religion, is this not a function of the privileges afforded to religion over the years? Whilst there are things on which Humanists and the conservatively religious will agree, as the religious have had their own way, these don’t tend to be “issues” anymore. There are issues that Humanists can work with the “progressively” religious because the progressively religious will embrace new ideas that do conflict with conservative thought.<br /><br />Is it worth making more of the parallel development of Humanism and religion? A. C. Grayling in the Intelligence Squared debate “Atheism is the new Fundamentalism” claimed that much of “Christian” morality was taken wholesale from the Stoics and you’ve got the “golden rule” as far back as Confucius. A common complaint of the religious (eg Dinesh D’Souza) is that humanist ethics are parasitical on religious ethics. The history sketched out suggests that religion and humanism at least cross-fertilised and if one way is dominant then its religion’s borrowing from humanism.Tony Lloydhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03740295390214409286noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-18073831600737897242009-12-21T12:41:27.509+00:002009-12-21T12:41:27.509+00:00Apologies for the sloppy grammar in the last post,...Apologies for the sloppy grammar in the last post, I should really proof read before clicking submit.pikeamus Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13645886532362427437noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-78683073777491434762009-12-21T12:40:21.058+00:002009-12-21T12:40:21.058+00:00It was my understanding that the what Confucius sa...It was my understanding that the what Confucius said was called the silver rule, rather than the golden rule. They are similar though I think they differ enough in practice to deserve different names.<br /><br />There is also the proverb:<br />When someone said, "What do you think of repaying evil with kindness?" Confucius replied, "Then what are you going to repaying kindness with? Repay kindness with kindness , but repay evil with justice."<br />This could be considered a comment on the limits of the golden rule could it not?pikeamus Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13645886532362427437noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-91904522114117352212009-12-20T03:05:43.081+00:002009-12-20T03:05:43.081+00:00Many sites and people make weird generalizations &...Many sites and people make weird generalizations "Eastern" as opposed to "Western" philosophy and religion. Few realize that in the East they had equally as huge variety of thought as the West. Your essay illustrates this well. Thank you.Sabio Lantzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12963476276106907984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-6600313775368400232009-12-20T00:22:37.860+00:002009-12-20T00:22:37.860+00:00Hi Stephen,
I thought, on the first reading, that...Hi Stephen,<br /><br />I thought, on the first reading, that it is a good historical summary and a balanced one. I thought for a moment that you were going to overlook John Stuart Mill (he's featured in the November/December, Issue 76, of <i>Philosophy Now</i>).<br /><br />I believe our political and justice system (Australia's being modelled on the English 'Westminster' parliametary system) is more humanist than Christian, and shows the influence of the Enlightenment and Utilitarian philosophies.<br /><br />You make no mention of 20th Century existentialism. I'm thinking of people like Camus and Sartre, in particular Sartre's essay, <i>Existentialism is a Humanism</i>. I believe it is this form of humanism that influenced the cultural revolution of the 1960s, particularly the rise of feminism and the youth challenging the politicians of the day over our involvement in the Vietnam war. <br /><br />Of course, this last event has a specific resonance in America and Australia, but there was a backlash against conservatism in politics and religion, at that time, throughout the entire Western world, albeit expressed largely through pop culture.<br /><br />I know that, in Australia, this period pretty well extinguished the Church's overt role in politics.<br /><br />Regards, Paul.Paul P. Mealinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14573615711151742992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-43470912694584808322009-12-19T21:58:22.039+00:002009-12-19T21:58:22.039+00:00This sentence is a bit mangled:
"In 1810, Ch...This sentence is a bit mangled:<br /><br />"In 1810, Charles Bradlaugh, joint founder of the National Secular Society in 1866, became Britain’s first openly atheist member of Parliament (though his atheism meant he could not take the Oath of Allegiance, and so was consequently barred from taking his seat for several years)"<br /><br />In 1810, Bradlaugh was still 23 years away from being born!<br /><br />In fact, Bradlaugh was elected one of the MPs for Northampton in 1880. He claimed the right to affirm, but was not permitted to do so. He then tried to take the oath, but this too was refused. That's how his struggle to take his seat began.<br /><br />DanDannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-2412174227703463702009-12-19T20:55:38.248+00:002009-12-19T20:55:38.248+00:00Stephen,
In then line "...such as Kant, did ...Stephen,<br /><br />In then line "...such as Kant, did indeed suppose reason could be founded upon reason alone,... "<br />did you mean "<i>morality</i> could be founded upon reason alone.." ?<br /><br />Do you think it is worth mentioning Spinoza?wombatnoreply@blogger.com