Editing Secular humanism (section)

==Ethics and relationship to religious belief==
{{See also|Secular ethics}}
In the 20th and 21st centuries, members of Humanist organizations have disagreed as to whether Humanism is a religion. They categorize themselves in one of three ways. [[Religious humanism|Religious (or ethical) humanism]], in the tradition of the earliest humanist organizations in the UK and US, attempts to fulfil the traditional social role of religion. Contemporary use of the word "religious" did not have the same connotations as its today.<ref>{{Cite book|title=The Genesis of a Humanist Manifesto|author=Wilson, Edwin H.|year=1995|publisher=Humanist Press|location=Amherst, NY}} This book quotes the constitution of the Humanistic Religious Association of London, founded in 1853, as saying, "In forming ourselves into a progressive religious body, we have adopted the name 'Humanistic Religious Association' to convey the idea that Religion is a principle inherent in man and is a means of developing his being towards greater perfection. We have emancipated ourselves from the ancient compulsory dogmas, myths and ceremonies borrowed of old from Asia and still pervading the ruling churches of our age".</ref> Secular humanism considers all forms of religion, including religious humanism, to be superseded.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Living Without Religion: Eupraxophy|author=Kurtz, Paul|year=1995|publisher=Prometheus Books|location=Amherst, NY|page=8}}</ref>

However, distinctions between "ethical" and "secular" humanists are for the most part historical, and practically meaningless in the present day or to contemporary individuals who identify with humanism. Since the mid-20th century, the development of new concepts such as the "[[life stance#Humanism|life stance]]" (which encompasses both humanist views and religious outlooks) has defused this conflict. Most humanist organisations identify with "humanism" without a pre-modifier (such a "secular" or "ethical") and assert humanism as a non-religious philosophy or approach to life. Generally speaking, all humanists, including religious humanists, reject deference to supernatural beliefs; promote the practical, [[methodological naturalism]] of science; and largely endorse the stance of [[metaphysical naturalism]].<ref>[http://ncse.com/religion/science-religion-methodology-humanism Eugenie C. Scott, National Centre for Science and Education, "Science and Religion, Methodology and Humanism"]: "science must be limited to using just natural forces in its explanations.This is sometimes referred to as the principle of methodological materialism in science ... Scientists use only methodological materialism because it is logical, but primarily because it works. We don't need to use supernatural forces to explain nature, and we get farther in our understanding of nature by relying on natural causes."</ref> The result is an approach to issues in a secular way. Humanism addresses ethics without reference to the supernatural as well, attesting that ethics is a human enterprise (see [[naturalistic ethics]]).<ref name="americanhumanist"/><ref name="oxford-secularhumanism"/><ref name="humaniststudies"/>

Accounts of humanism are also careful not to treat secular humanism analogously with religions, which implies a community who strictly attempt to adhere to the same obligations or beliefs. Holding a secular humanist philosophy does not prescribe a specific theory of morality or code of ethics. As stated by the Council for Secular Humanism,
{{blockquote|Secular Humanism is not so much a specific morality as it is a method for the explanation and discovery of rational moral principles.<ref name="A Secular Humanist Declaration">{{cite web |url=http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=main&page=declaration#morals |title=A Secular Humanist Declaration |publisher=Secularhumanism.org |date=29 July 2005 |access-date=13 November 2011 |archive-date=17 August 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080817084107/http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=main&page=declaration#morals |url-status=dead }}</ref>}}

Secular humanists affirm that with the present state of scientific knowledge, dogmatic belief in an absolutist moral or ethical system (e.g. Kantian, Islamic, Christian) is unreasonable. However, it affirms that individuals engaging in rational moral/ethical deliberations can discover some universal "objective standards".
{{blockquote|We are opposed to absolutist morality, yet we maintain that objective standards emerge, and ethical values and principles may be discovered, in the course of ethical deliberation.<ref name="A Secular Humanist Declaration"/>}}

Many humanists adopt principles of the [[Golden Rule (ethics)|Golden Rule]]. Some believe that universal moral standards are required for the proper functioning of society. However, they believe such necessary universality can and should be achieved by developing a richer notion of morality through reason, experience and scientific inquiry rather than through faith in a supernatural realm or source.<ref>{{Cite book|title=On Humanism|last=Norman|first=Richard|publisher=Routledge|year=2004|isbn=9780415305228|location=New York}}</ref>
{{blockquote|Fundamentalists correctly perceive that universal moral standards are required for the proper functioning of society. But they erroneously believe that God is the only possible source of such standards. Philosophers as diverse as [[Plato]], [[Immanuel Kant]], [[John Stuart Mill]], [[George Edward Moore]], and [[John Rawls]] have demonstrated that it is possible to have a universal morality without God. Contrary to what the fundamentalists would have us believe, then, what our society really needs is not more religion but a richer notion of the nature of morality.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://secularhumanism.org/1997/06/morality-requires-god-or-does-it/ |title=Morality Requires God ... or Does It? |author=Theodore Schick, Jr |publisher=Secularhumanism.org |date=29 July 2005 |access-date=12 December 2020}}</ref>}}

Humanists [[Andrew Copson]] and [[Alice Roberts]], in their [[self-help book|casual introduction]] to humanism ''The Little Book of Humanism'', propose that a distinctive aspect of humanist morality is its recognition that every moral situation is in some sense unique, and so potentially calls for different approach than the last (i.e. the ability to vacillate situationally between [[consequentialism]] and [[virtue ethics]]).<ref>{{cite book|title=The Little Book of Humanism|date=2020|publisher=[[Little, Brown|Piaktus]]|last1=Copson|last2=Roberts|first1=Andrew|first2=Alice|quote=Every time we have to make a difficult moral choice, there will be something new and different about it. So applying the same rule every time is not going to work. It doesn't mean our values have changed. It's more that the situations in which we apply them are different – and so we make different choices in practice.<br>This requires careful thought. Sometimes, we might find we've settled into ways of thinking that mean we're applying rules, even if those are own rules. We need to challenge ourselves – not just acting on what seems like instinct or intuition but going back to thinking carefully about consequences and virtues again.|pages=94–95}}</ref> In the book, they quote from [[Kristen Bell]]'s advocacy of [[moral particularism]] as developed by [[Jonathan Dancy]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/kristen-bell-drops-some-ethical-gems-she-learned-on-the-good-place_n_5d4c6edde4b0066eb70ebb0a|title=Kristen Bell Drops Some Ethical Gems She Learned On 'The Good Place'|last=Yam|first=Kimberly|date=9 August 2018|accessdate=1 February 2021}}</ref>

Humanism is compatible with [[atheism]], and by definition usually entails at least a form of [[weak atheism|weak]] or [[agnostic atheism]],<ref>{{Cite book
| last=Baggini
| first=Julian
| author-link=Julian Baggini
| title=Atheism: A Very Short Introduction
| pages=3–4
| quote=The atheist's rejection of belief in God is usually accompanied by a broader rejection of any [[supernatural]] or [[transcendence (religion)|transcendental]] reality. For example, an atheist does not usually believe in the existence of immortal [[soul]]s, [[afterlife|life after death]], ghosts, or supernatural powers. Although strictly speaking an atheist could believe in any of these things and still remain an atheist... the arguments and ideas that sustain atheism tend naturally to rule out other beliefs in the supernatural or transcendental.
| publisher=Oxford: Oxford University Press
| year=2003
| isbn=0-19-280424-3}}</ref> and agnosticism,<ref>
{{Cite book
| editor-last=Winston
| editor-first=Robert 
| title=Human
| quote=Neither atheism nor agnosticism is a full belief system, because they have no fundamental philosophy or lifestyle requirements. These forms of thought are simply the absence of belief in, or denial of, the existence of deities.
| publisher=New York: DK Publishing, Inc
| year=2004
| isbn=0-7566-1901-7
| page=299}}</ref>
but being atheist or agnostic does not automatically make one a humanist. Nevertheless, humanism is diametrically opposed to [[state atheism]].<ref name="Tolerance">{{cite book|author1=Paul Kurtz |author2=Vern L. Bullough |author3=Tim Madigan |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=e9OJSW5dkM8C&q=militant+atheist+deaths&pg=PA250|title=Toward a New Enlightenment: the Philosophy of Paul Kurtz|publisher=Transaction Books|quote=In the past, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union waged unremitting warfare against religion. It persecuted religious believers, confiscated church properties, executed or exiled tens of thousands of clerics, and prohibited believers to engage in religious instruction or publish religious materials. It has also carried on militant pro-atheist propaganda campaigns as part of the official ideology of the state, in an effort to establish a "new Soviet man" committed to the ideals of Communist society. Mikhail Gorbachev is dismantling such policies by permitting greater freedom of religious conscience. If his reforms proceed unabated, they could have dramatic implications for the entire Communist world, for the Russians may be moving from militant atheism to tolerant humanism.|date=19 October 2009|isbn=978-1-56000-118-8}}</ref><ref name="KurtzCriticism">{{cite book
|author1=Paul Kurtz |author2=Vern L. Bullough |author3=Tim Madigan |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=e9OJSW5dkM8C&q=militant+atheist+deaths&pg=PA250
|title=Toward a New Enlightenment: the Philosophy of Paul Kurtz
|publisher=Transaction Books
|quote=Ranged against the true believer are the militant atheists, who adamantly reject the faith as false stupid, and reactionary. They consider all religious believers to be gullible fools and claim that they are given to accepting gross exaggerations and untenable premises. Historic religious claims, they think, are totally implausible, unbelievable, disreputable, and controvertible, for they go beyond the bounds of reason. Militant atheists can find no value at all to any religious beliefs or institutions. They resist any effort to engage in inquiry or debate. Madalyn Murray O'Hair is as arrogant in her rejection of religion as is the true believer in his or her profession of faith. This form of atheism thus becomes mere dogma.|date=19 October 2009
|isbn=978-1-56000-118-8}}</ref>
According to [[Paul Kurtz]], considered by some to be the founder of the American secular humanist movement,<ref name="Humanism">{{cite book
|url=http://www.pointofinquiry.org/paul_kurtz_the_new_atheism_and_secular_humanism/
|title=The New Atheism and Secular Humanism|publisher=Center for Inquiry|quote=Paul Kurtz, considered by many the father of the secular humanist movement, is Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the State University of New York at Buffalo.
|date=19 October 2009}}</ref> one of the differences between Marxist–Leninist atheists and [[humanists]] is the latter's commitment to "human freedom and democracy" while stating that the militant atheism of the Soviet Union consistently violated basic human rights.<ref name="Rights">{{cite book|author1=Paul Kurtz |author2=Vern L. Bullough |author3=Tim Madigan |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=e9OJSW5dkM8C&q=militant+atheist+deaths&pg=PA250|title=Toward a New Enlightenment: the Philosophy of Paul Kurtz|publisher=Transaction Books|quote=There have been fundamental and irreconcilable differences between humanists and atheists, particularly Marxist-Leninists. The defining characteristic of humanism is its commitment to human freedom and democracy; the kind of atheism practiced in the Soviet Union has consistently violated basic human rights. Humanists believe first and foremost in the freedom of conscience, the free mind, and the right of dissent. The defense of religious liberty is as precious to the humanist as are the rights of the believers.|date=19 October 2009|isbn=978-1-56000-118-8}}</ref>
Kurtz also stated that the "defense of [[religious liberty]] is as precious to the humanist as are the rights of the believers".<ref name="Rights" /> Greg M. Epstein states that, "modern, organized Humanism began, in the minds of its founders, as nothing more nor less than a religion without a God".<ref>{{cite book|title= Good Without God: What a Billion Nonreligious People Do Believe|last= Esptein|first= Greg M.|year= 2010|publisher= HarperCollins|location= New York|isbn= 978-0-06-167011-4|url-access= registration|url= https://archive.org/details/goodwithoutgodwh00epst}}</ref>

Many humanists address ethics from the point of view of [[ethical naturalism]], and some support an actual [[science of morality]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/entry/the_science_of_morality/|title=The Science of Morality |date=7 September 2010 |publisher= Center for Inquiry|access-date=12 June 2015}}</ref>