Somewhere in this vast infinite universe their is a galaxy called the milky way, and in the milky way is a small solar system which houses planet Earth. Through a finite number of some millions if years, humanity appears. This is the evolution of lower forms of life into the higher; And into the not yet achieved advances of life. Humanists propose that these advances will be a passing from a supernatural religion into a scientific self-actualization, and from Capitalism into socialism, etc. Evolution presses forward.
Humanism then makes arguments from this foundation that claims, as in the fifth paragraph of the manifesto that "Humanism asserts that the nature of the universe depicted by modern science makes unacceptable any supernatural or cosmic guarantees of human values..." and from the sixth "We are convinced that the time has passed for theism, deism, modernism, and the several varieties of 'new thought'. I must however question, if you follow this string of argument, what conclusion will be tied to the end?
The Humanists conclude that because of the nature of the universe and evolution that modern theism is an item of derision and is completely antiquated because science disproves it, and that theism will ultimately fizzle out. This conclusion formulated from the premise however is extremely short sighted and limited; this argument the Humanists propose dose not come to a complete conclusion. Provided we use the premises that the Humanists take, namely infinity of the universe, time, matter, energy, and evolution we will come to a radically different conclusion than the Humanists took.
Let me explain the proper conclusion upon the evolutionary lines upon our own planet: life appears on our planet at a most primitive level, life becomes more complicated and advanced as natural selection and other biological forces mutates one species into another, life fills the oceans, life spreads to land. we find upon the land, amphibians, reptiles, mammals, birds, and marsupials. Curiously, after millions of years of these evolutionary forces at work, we find a sapient creature upon the face of the earth: the creature is man. This intelligent creature, man, then goes through higher and higher levels of advancements in science, politics, sociology, etc. We than come to the twentieth century where we find our beloved Humanists living in the century that will learn to escape earth's surface and travel beyond our solar system into the ethers of space.
To be Continued
Image Courtesy of Nasa
https://www.nasa.gov/topics/universe/features/pia14093.html
Humanism then makes arguments from this foundation that claims, as in the fifth paragraph of the manifesto that "Humanism asserts that the nature of the universe depicted by modern science makes unacceptable any supernatural or cosmic guarantees of human values..." and from the sixth "We are convinced that the time has passed for theism, deism, modernism, and the several varieties of 'new thought'. I must however question, if you follow this string of argument, what conclusion will be tied to the end?
The Humanists conclude that because of the nature of the universe and evolution that modern theism is an item of derision and is completely antiquated because science disproves it, and that theism will ultimately fizzle out. This conclusion formulated from the premise however is extremely short sighted and limited; this argument the Humanists propose dose not come to a complete conclusion. Provided we use the premises that the Humanists take, namely infinity of the universe, time, matter, energy, and evolution we will come to a radically different conclusion than the Humanists took.
To be Continued
Image Courtesy of Nasa
https://www.nasa.gov/topics/universe/features/pia14093.html
No comments:
Post a Comment