Subject: Re: Moral Progress
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004
From: Dr. Chic Schissel
To: Pantheists.org

Flash: some responses:

Why then is the reality of secularists like Dahmer so different than yours? Factor in the millions who were killed by secular leaders such as Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot

The argument can be made that these leaders were not secular, but believers in faith-based social systems whose dogma was as rigid as (other) religions. And I can say that Dahmer’s reality was not real, and mine is, since I am sane (don’t ask for supporting data!).

fundamentalists have given up practicing slavery

Islamic fundamentalists still practice slavery, and, I think, if many of our own American fundamentalists had their way we would have slavery here.

If your retreat to "Escapism" was only temporary, and you are still willing to defend "Secular Humanism," I assume that you still regard your neural operating system as "true" compared to that of the theists. I assume the subroutines of your neural operating system are not called by the names of gods. but by names like "justice," "fairness," "morality," "altruism," etc. Are these not also concepts with no material embodiment to prove their "reality?" Is not their only manifestation the effect they have on their believers? Do they not require faith from believers to exist?

I never called myself a secular humanist, although I have no quarrel with what they say they stand for. The only label I ever claimed for myself was "Atheist", only in the sense that I don’t believe in any God that has ever been described to me. That doesn’t mean that I might never have a God described that I might, however unlikely, accept. My concept of "true" is that it sounds reasonable considering the available evidence; seems to offer a higher probability than alternatives. My "subroutines" like morality, etc., seem to have some material embodiment in the sense that there is evidence that they help a society function. Surely they require some faith, but less faith than the supernatural.

I’m not entirely sure what you mean by Pantheism. Does it eliminate the supernatural, making God and nature the same? What is the distinction between that and secular humanism? Surely rules are desirable: does God make the rules; does Nature make the rules; does God-Nature make the rules? Or does a priesthood make the rules? And does it make a real difference?

I'm lecturing tomorrow (Jan. 14) about alternative medicine before the NY secular humanists (SLC Conference center, 352 &th Ave., (29-30 streets), 16th floor, 7:00 PM.) If you are there please say hello.

Regards, Chic Schissel