Comments on: The Humanist Identity Project Email

By: Political Jaywalker

Political Jaywalker — Tue, 25 Dec 2007 06:44:15 +0000

Thanks for posting this humanist identity project, I enjoyed reading it and couldn’t help blogging about it too.

By: Michael

Michael — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 18:19:03 +0000

This is a project that was started by David Niose about two years ago. It began with several top names in science appearing on the cover of the Humanist magazine. The project is now trying to reach a more grassroots level, getting people to proclaim their “Humanist Identity.”

Michael

By: Jeff P

Jeff P — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 17:34:36 +0000

My preference would be for someone to have a way for non-believers to be able to appreciate the sheer number of other national non-believers, in a way that would protect identity but which might allow accurate calibration–in other words, what exactly is the “power in numbers” of non-believers?

Maybe such a method doesn’t exist, but I would be willing to put my name down as a non-believer to the degree that it would be helpful for others to know.

I would be less likely to forward an e-mail, as others have suggested.

By: TXatheist

TXatheist — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:15:48 +0000

I think Rob is right. Most people are aware of my humanism but I wouldn’t tell someone in an interview or if I had my own business because unfortunately there is prejudice.

Mike C,
I think Christian humanist is a great description of people like you(compliment intended)

By: HappyNat

HappyNat — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 13:38:22 +0000

If I forward this around Bill Gates will send me money, right?

By: aidan

aidan — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 08:27:47 +0000

The term Humanist in itself is sort of off-putting. It doesn’t really say anything beyond the vaguely obvious. The comment up top that more people should come out including Rastafarians certainly broadens the definition. I’m not sure if there is a sub-class known as Thelemic Humanist, if so that’s where I would hang my hat. But broadening the appeal is the way to go if only because people in general seem to have difficulty with concepts that have an abstract ring to them – ‘Atheist’ even being one of those. People need to be made aware that we aren’t just a generic brand of non-believer.

By: Joel Sax

Joel Sax — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 07:39:13 +0000

Small problem here: Humanist Identity sounds too much like Christian Identity which is a white-supremacist organization. Maybe we could come up with another catchy phrase for the project?

By: Tom

Tom — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 06:38:16 +0000

Maybe I’m making an incorrect analogy here (and I’m sure I’ll be blogally-bitchslapped if I’m wrong), but isn’t that difference similar to a campaign requesting people to come out as Christians-in-general versus another that wants you to come out specifically as, say, a Methodist?

Sorry Hemant, gotta bitch-slap ya here. In your analogy, you have “Cristians-in-general” (A) being further reduced to a single denomination.(B)

If atheist were (A), you cannot reduce/go down a level to get humanist (b)

All atheist is is not believing in a god. This INCLUDES Lavayaan Satanists, who I don’t agree with at all. I personally find it hard to identify myself simply as an atheist when it most definitely includes people like this.

It’s tempting to apply Occam’s Razor here, and just keep it simple without having all these different name for atheist.

But in my belief, (A) does not equal (B), humanism is a bigger thing.

By: Mriana

Mriana — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 05:48:38 +0000

MikeClawson said,

December 17, 2007 at 10:49 pm

Anyway, there is a wide umbrella covering many types of Humanists.

That’s good to hear. Anyway, while, as you say, there may not be many Humanists who also call themselves Christians, I know plenty of Christians who would also consider themselves to be humanists (in the tradition of Erasmus, Pascal, Kierkegaard, etc.)

If they knew more about humanism, they might call themselves humanist too. I think I mentioned a couple of books on the subject of Christian Humanism in one of the most recent threads.

By: Richard Wade

Richard Wade — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 05:09:19 +0000

I see a logistical flaw in the way this is set up. If a humanist gets this email from someone else, then s/he knows of only one other humanist by this medium. Then if s/he sends it on to “at least five other people” they only know of one person who is a humanist by this medium, and so forth. The letter does not say, “Hey if you’re a humanist too, please get back to me.” It just says to send it on to others. The result may be millions of humanists who only know of one other humanist by this method, so nothing has changed as far as being in the dark about their actual numbers.

This kind of thing is only useful if there is a central tallying of the numbers of people who belong to any of the non-theist points of view. Then everybody gets to know how many there are.