As opposed to religions, which are founded on unsubstantiated if not outright debunked ideas, Secular Humanism is a philosophy of life founded on skepticism, empiricism, and reason. As a result, we not only have the capacity to better understand what is likely to be true, but we can also discern what is probably false, including supernaturalism.
Skepticism
Humans are not always the best judges of what is real/true and what
isn’t. Our brains are not video recorders that keep perfect records of past
events. Instead, memories become distorted and change over time.[1]
In addition, we tend to view the world through the lens of our own biases,
preconceived notions, emotional states, desires, etc, which skews our
understanding of reality. As I mentioned in previous posts, when people hold
strong beliefs, they will go to almost any length to maintain them. In
addition, we also hold many unrealistic beliefs about our abilities and the
probability of positive events occurring in the future. On top of all of this,
we are susceptible to visual and auditory hallucinations and illusions, which
impact our perceptions of the world. Finally, people lie to manipulate others
to suit their own agendas. Thus, it pays to have a healthy amount of skepticism
toward the stated beliefs of others as well as our own perceptions of reality. Sometimes
what is obviously true is actually false, and what is obviously false may
actually be true.
Empiricism
Since even our own feelings, judgments, and memories may be faulty, the
only way to be able to ascertain probable truth is the availability of quality
evidence. The best evidence derives from science, because scientists are
trained in research methods and statistical techniques that have been shown to
be effective in uncovering the probability of patterns. We know science works
because, as Richard Dawkins so eloquently put it, "Planes fly. Cars drive.
Computers compute. If you base medicine on science, you cure people. If you
base the design of planes on science, they fly. If you base the design of
rockets on science, they reach the moon. It works, bitches.”[2]
Thus, one good study conducted by a good scientist can help to understand what
is probably (i.e. more than 50% likely to be) true. However, other confirming
studies and/or a consensus from the scientific establishment are required to be
confident that any particular explanation is very probably true.
Reason
Most of us do not have the luxury of a scientific consensus for every
aspect of our lives in which we need to form judgments. In addition, sometimes
we alone need to review the best available evidence and come to a conclusion
regarding what the evidence suggests is probably true. This requires the ability
to reason. There are three main types of reason:
- Deductive: (conclusion guaranteed) starts with the assertion of a general rule and proceeds to a guaranteed specific conclusion.[3] E.g. if x = 4 and y =1, then 2x + y = 9
- Inductive: (conclusion likely) begins with observations that are specific and limited in scope, and proceeds to a generalized conclusion that is likely, but not certain, in light of accumulated evidence.[4] E.g. all cats that you have observed purr. Therefore, every cat purrs.
- Abductive: (educated guess) begins with an incomplete set of observations and proceeds to the likeliest possible explanation for the set.[5] E.g. the lawn is wet, so it probably rained last night.
Fallacies
Fallacies are errors in logic, which invalidate any argument for a
particular claim. While fallacies may show a line of reasoning is false, they
do not necessarily indicate the underlying claim is false. However, untrue
claims are more likely to be believed by those who employ flawed reasoning to
support them. Thus, while fallacies don’t invalidate claims, they are a strong
red flag that one should be skeptical of the claims. Given their usefulness, it
helps to know the main types that people employ during arguments. Here are a
few:
- Appeal to Nature: because something is 'natural' it is therefore valid, justified, inevitable, good or ideal. [6]
- Ad Hominem: an attack on an opponent's character or personal traits in an attempt to undermine their argument. [7]
- Argument from Ignorance: claiming that something is true because it has never been proven false, or that something is false because it has never been proven to be true. This is often phrased as "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."[8]
- Appeal to Tradition: occurs when it is assumed that something is better or correct simply because it is older, traditional, or “always has been done.”[9]
Baloney Detection
Beyond fallacies, there are other red flags that tend to pop up when
claims are likely to be false. For example, the Richard Dawkins Foundation for
Reason and Science and Skeptic Magazine editor Michael Shermer worked together
to form a 10-point checklist for assessing the believability of a claim as a part
of their “Baloney Detection Kit”. While it may not be exhaustive, it is
certainly useful:
- How reliable is the source of the claim?
- Does the source make similar claims?
- Have the claims been verified by somebody else?
- Does this fit with the way the world works?
- Has anyone tried to disprove the claim?
- Where does the preponderance of evidence point?
- Is the claimant playing by the rules of science?
- Is the claimant providing positive evidence?
- Does the new theory account for as many phenomena as the old theory?
- Are personal beliefs driving the claim?[10]
Education
In order to discern quality evidence and arguments, one must be
educated. It requires mental training to think critically and to properly
analyze data and arguments. It takes knowledge of the world and of recent
scientific advances in order to effectively apply these skills to make quality
life decisions. While education from school certainly provides much of the
foundation for these skills and knowledge, they fade over time without use. In
addition, without continually seeking new knowledge, people may make judgments
based on old ideas that have been shown to be untrue. Thus, good Secular
Humanists not only value reason and learning, but we also accept that probable
truths change as more scientific knowledge is accumulated.
Given our predilection for reason, evidence, and education, Secular
Humanists do not believe in any gods or supernatural forces. There is simply no
evidence for the supernatural that cannot be better explained by known natural phenomena.
Unfortunately, given our innate inclinations to believe in invisible agents and
magical forces, it tends to require a lot of reasoning skills and intelligence
to acknowledge this fact. This is strongly supported by scientific evidence, as
those who have a greater capacity to override their intuitive cognition (a.k.a.
“rational” thinkers) tend to be less likely to be religious.[11]
This would partially explain why, in a 2009 Pew survey, 2/5 of American
scientists said they did not believe in a god or a higher power, compared to 4%
of the general public.[12]
Beyond rational vs. intuitive thinking, general intelligence is also a strong
indicator of irreligiosity. In a recent meta-study of 63 separate studies, 53
showed a strong negative correlation between intelligence and religiosity.[13]
As the study concluded “Most extant explanations (of a negative relation) share
one central theme - the premise that religious beliefs are irrational, not
anchored in science, not testable and, therefore, unappealing to intelligent
people who ‘know better’.”[14]
Conclusion
Secular Humanists understand that humans are flawed thinkers. Thus, we
seek to rely on the best available explanations of the best available evidence
to understand what claims are likely to be true. Since there is no clear cut
set of rules regarding what will be true for all time, we strive to equip
ourselves with the tools of reason and knowledge to navigate life. As a result
of our strict desire to understand the truth, we reject the belief that gods
and other supernatural forces probably exist.
Resources:
Funny article regarding the 5 psychological flaws that alter our
perception of reality
Baloney detection toolkit video and list
Good article about how rational cognition leads to irreligiosity
Thank you for the auspicious writeup. It in fact was a amusement account it.
ReplyDeleteLook advanced to far added agreeable from you!
By the way, how can we communicate?
Feel free to visit my web page website []