Humanitas

[PanzerJaeger]

Great new group.

I do have some issues with the ground rules though.

Philanthropy, Humanity and Charity: Love all human beings (men, women, children, old ones, colored ones, invalids, pagans, bad people)

Bad people? Do you support a prison system, or simply aggressive rehabilitation? Its easy to love all those other people but the mechanics of loving bad people is tricky. How would you treat murderers, rapists, ect?

Equality

Thats pretty broad. If I were to adapt this principle would it mean I would have to treat illegal immigrants the same as legal immigrants? Do i have to treat those equally who dont treat me the same way?

Pacifism: Rejection of any War of Aggression

What about wars for liberation? Wouldnt this rejection of any war conflict with your love of humanity? What about the humans living under tyrants? Shouldnt they live equally?

Political and Religious Tolerance

How far does this go? Does it cover hate speech? Humanists of the past havent been very tolorent of hate speech, how will you address it?

Freedom of Conscience

Please explain. Does this mean people should do whatever they want with no fear of being judged? How would you enforce that?

Good luck, great principles youve got..

[A.Saturnus]

Bad people? Do you support a prison system, or simply aggressive rehabilitation? Its easy to love all those other people but the mechanics of loving bad people is tricky. How would you treat murderers, rapists, ect?

Prison system is necessary. Humanism rejects punishment for the purpose of revenge or retribution, but not for the purpose of social coherence. For the humanist, prison has four goals:
general prevention
individual prevention
detainment
order of law

These things are necessary for the working of society.

Thats pretty broad. If I were to adapt this principle would it mean I would have to treat illegal immigrants the same as legal immigrants? Do i have to treat those equally who dont treat me the same way?

How someone treats you has no bearence on the way you have to behave. Illegal immigrants are criminals and may be treated as it is necessary for society.

What about wars for liberation? Wouldnt this rejection of any war conflict with your love of humanity? What about the humans living under tyrants? Shouldnt they live equally?

Well, as I said above the wording may not have been optimal. Defence and humanitarian aid may require the use of violence.

How far does this go? Does it cover hate speech? Humanists of the past havent been very tolorent of hate speech, how will you address it?

Good question. Some say that tolerance can tolerate anything except intolerance. It might be reducable to an empirical question: how much harm is actually caused by hate speech?

Please explain. Does this mean people should do whatever they want with no fear of being judged? How would you enforce that?

Not do but think. People should be free to think and feel as they want to, but that doesn`t grant them the right to interfere with the rights of others.

[PanzerJaeger]

Thanks for the informative answers. It doesnt seem so idealistic now.

[bmolsson]

Human dignity and still posting here ??

[Roark]

I think these are great values and I support the philosophy of Humanitas...

...but I'm really suspicious about how well this thread seems to be going...

[Franconicus]

It doesnt seem so idealistic now.

O.K., I work on that

[Papewaio]

Ahimsa

n : a Buddhist and Hindu and especially Jainist doctrine holding that all forms of life are sacred and urging the avoidance of violence.

phi·lan·thro·py ( P ) Pronunciation Key (f-lnthr-p)
n. pl. phi·lan·thro·pies
The effort or inclination to increase the well-being of humankind, as by charitable aid or donations.
Love of humankind in general.
Something, such as an activity or institution, intended to promote human welfare.

hu·man·i·ty ( P ) Pronunciation Key (hy-mn-t)
n. pl. hu·man·i·ties
Humans considered as a group; the human race.
The condition or quality of being human.
The quality of being humane; benevolence.
A humane characteristic, attribute, or act.
humanities
The languages and literatures of ancient Greece and Rome; the classics.
Those branches of knowledge, such as philosophy, literature, and art, that are concerned with human thought and culture; the liberal arts.

Freedom of thought (also called freedom of conscience) is the freedom of an individual to hold a viewpoint, or thought, regardless of anyone else's view. The suppression of freedom of thought is a prominent characteristic of totalitarian and authoritarian regimes, while freedom of thought is one of the fundamental principles of most democracies. Freedom of thought can be limited in several ways — through censorship, arrests, book burning, or, more subtly, through propaganda.

A government displays religious toleration or religious tolerance when it legally permits or does not interfere with religious activities associated with sects other than than the state religion.

A group (or individual) displays religious toleration or religious tolerance when it does not oppose by force, does not oppose by rhetoric, or actively supports religious beliefs or activities of which it is not a part.

Religious tolerance does not mean one must view any or all other religions as equally valid to theirs but simply that one accepts other's right to hold religoius beliefs different from own's own and practice their religion as they see fit, within reason.

Freedom of religion is based upon the legal concept of having freedom of belief as a matter of right, while freedom of worship is the freedom to engage in religious expressions and activities as a matter of right. Religious toleration by a state is a legal theory founded upon endurance and the absence of that basic freedom, because a religion has been previously established by the state.

There seems to be a logical break or a religion by stealth attempt here. Humanitas talks about religious tolerance while at the same time promoting the doctrine of a certain religion above others? Surely equality would mean that no religion is used as the basis or all have to be used?

Or has the list already disproved the validity of the arguement that there is such a thing as equality when the basis of this code just happens by chance to align itself with a particular religion putting it accidentally in the forefront of the group?

[Franconicus]

Ahimsa

n : a Buddhist and Hindu and especially Jainist doctrine holding that all forms of life are sacred and urging the avoidance of violence.

phi·lan·thro·py ( P ) Pronunciation Key (f-lnthr-p)
n. pl. phi·lan·thro·pies
The effort or inclination to increase the well-being of humankind, as by charitable aid or donations.
Love of humankind in general.
Something, such as an activity or institution, intended to promote human welfare.

hu·man·i·ty ( P ) Pronunciation Key (hy-mn-t)
n. pl. hu·man·i·ties
Humans considered as a group; the human race.
The condition or quality of being human.
The quality of being humane; benevolence.
A humane characteristic, attribute, or act.
humanities
The languages and literatures of ancient Greece and Rome; the classics.
Those branches of knowledge, such as philosophy, literature, and art, that are concerned with human thought and culture; the liberal arts.

There seems to be a logical break or a religion by stealth attempt here. Humanitas talks about religious tolerance while at the same time promoting the doctrine of a certain religion above others? Surely equality would mean that no religion is used as the basis or all have to be used?

Or has the list already disproved the validity of the arguement that there is such a thing as equality when the basis of this code just happens by chance to align itself with a particular religion putting it accidentally in the forefront of the group?

Pape, of course our ideals have intersections with different religions. How could they not. The idea to love all men even your enemy can be found by Jesus, too. So what?

[Pindar]

. Humanism rejects punishment for the purpose of revenge or retribution...

Says who?

(love the Classical metro-sexual look!)

[A.Saturnus]

Says who?

(love the Classical metro-sexual look!)

A humanist. A metro-sexual one.

There seems to be a logical break or a religion by stealth attempt here. Humanitas talks about religious tolerance while at the same time promoting the doctrine of a certain religion above others? Surely equality would mean that no religion is used as the basis or all have to be used?

Only if you accept the fallacy that humanitas is itself a religion. It does not have a religion as basis, though some religious believes are more compatible with it than others.

[Pindar]

A humanist. A metro-sexual one.

That's what I thought. Now if another humanist (who may or may not be metro-sexually inclined) argues for a retributive notion of justice, where does that place our Humanitas?

[A.Saturnus]

That's what I thought. Now if another humanist (who may or may not be metro-sexually inclined) argues for a retributive notion of justice, where does that place our Humanitas?

It places it in ambiguity like all other complex human made concepts. Argueing in favour of retribution might be possible for a humanist as long as it`s clear that the rights of every person may not be restricted too far whatever the circumstances.

Do I have to go to Louvain to have a sex change to join too?

No, but it might help in your case.

[Pindar]

It places it in ambiguity like all other complex human made concepts. Argueing in favour of retribution might be possible for a humanist as long as it`s clear that the rights of every person may not be restricted too far whatever the circumstances.

Then that plank of Humanitas would need to be altered to be less categorical.