Humanism as an Alternative to Religion

Humanism as an Alternative to Religion Can Humanism (Humanism) Replace Religion? Can the human race live without religion? Is it possible to establish value, knowledge, purpose, and morality in the absence of God? Mankind has lived thousands of years under the influence of religion, and religion has been able to provide all aspects of moral, legal, doctrinal and even language life, so it is our right to ask whether it is possible to produce an entire atheistic generation. For this attempt to succeed, it is necessary to be brought up in complete isolation from every religion, from every art, from every drama of human existence, to abolish all that can conjure up before it a vision of another world, and thus to abolish all works of art that depict the struggle of man in the world and his aspiration for a better world, because all these things will lead to a feeling of human alienation in this world, which is a purely spiritual metaphysical feeling. In fact, this is difficult at the moment, because atheists live in the shadows of religion, and we can claim that all the morals of an atheist are merely influenced by religion and its basic moral principles, in an imperceptible, but steady, silent way, the atheist has been raised in the shadows of religion for decades, and in his criticism of religion is influenced by the morals of those who criticize them, the essence of man in his ethics and not in his material nature is a fixed fact. The morality of the atheist is the gift of religion, so we have to pretend until a complete atheistic society emerges. But beyond our pretensions, we will try to conceptualize epistemologically a mere simplistic picture of value and morality, from a purely atheistic materialist perspective, based on the view of atheists themselves. Vladimir Lenin, the founder of the atheist Bolshevik state, proved that morality is a metaphysical trick, and Friedrich Engels, the father of Marxist theory, decided in his book The Origin of the Family, the State, and Private Property that the family system is bourgeois, and that the popularization of women and the abolition of the marriage system is the closest solution to the spirit of material atheism. But why not be more optimistic and more down-to-earth, and assume that a complete atheistic society was founded on an idealistic morality! A perfect morality like that advocated by religion, a clear and well-established original morality in the human mind! But at this moment the advocates of atheism should ask for more idealism and sacrifice, perhaps more than any prophet has asked of his people in the name of religion, for there is no metaphysical temptation, no esoteric aspiration that justifies sacrifice and commitment to ideals, which is the essence of the moral cause! As the English thinker John Locke puts it: If all the logic of the Fathers is limited to this world, and if we enjoy life here in this world, it is not strange.” It is a dilemma and any dilemma, but we will come down again and imagine that the complete atheistic society has been established, and we imagine that these atheists decided to sacrifice and adopt a moral model, we continue to challenge the community of believers, and decided to leave evil and injustice, and decided to adhere to the ideal ethics, here will emerge the dilemma that has not been solved, within the physical universe there is no material meaning of evil or injustice, evil and the place of events is not in place of the ideal. Man is fully absorbed in nature, the laws of nature are his laws, physical physical determinism applies to him with the most cognitive tools, can not be independent of a vision beyond or contrary to what is imposed by matter, otherwise we consider that man has another origin and another introduction and the collapse of atheism. The mind is also a natural recipient material that does not go beyond this framework, and the psychological state ruling in the atheistic model is a psychological state of matter and not of the soul, and therefore cannot mistake another physical state, so that the atoms are not wrong as long as it is in accordance with the correct physical laws. According to this deterministic atheistic view, in the next stage man will give up his centrality, man from a materialistic atheistic perspective is not the center, but the center is the material nature and its laws and imperatives, and thus will replace the centrality of man's nature as the first absolute, and this means the collapse of the human project (the project of faith in man), and thus liquidating man on the The expression of Dr. Abdul Wahab Al-Masiri to calculate nature, and will be fully absorbed and fall into the dominance of materialism inevitability, and becomes any talk about man or values or centrality is a talk contaminated metaphysics, and turns man into an abstract material animal, and returns to the Darwinian conflict that entered history, and in this materialistic framework becomes the talk of humanism Goa empty, What does it mean to protect or help people with disabilities or genetic patients? Such an attempt is against natural selection and survival of the fittest, and if the Darwinian vision is the right vision, and its imperatives are the fixed origin, then man will not even understand the idea of protecting the disabled or providing a helping hand to the weak, but the sterilization of the disabled – that is, preventing them from procreation – is the best and only Darwinian solution. Also in the deterministic materialistic framework how is the concept of humanism advocated, in a world governed by the survival of the fittest? Indeed, any attempt to resist this materialistic framework is a failure, because it comes against evolution, and against the laws of material determinism that apply to existence. As the Darwinist James J. Hill said, “Wealth is determined by the law of survival of the strongest.” “It is a grave mistake to simply try to prevent poverty or bankruptcy or to help the weak or the productive,” says Tille, “merely to help them is a fundamental error in Darwinism, because it is fundamentally incompatible with natural selection, the essence of Darwinism.” According to Herbert Spencer, “The idea of health protections and state intervention in the health protection and vaccination of its citizens runs counter to the most basic axioms of natural selection, as well as supporting the weak or trying to protect and survive the sick.” This is the picture that material atheism presents, it is the impossible equation. It is impossible to establish morality within the material system, there is no within the material world what makes man happy or entertained, or establishes his values, or establishes his principles, or establishes his ethics, it is impossible to find within the material system what makes man human. Morality and value represent a loophole in the natural order; morality is a major knowledge loophole in the cosmic order, and therefore cannot be subordinated to the laws of nature, Marx's historical imperatives, Darwin's organic imperatives, or Durkheim's social imperatives; this difference between morality and nature expresses itself in the difference between the index in the natural sciences and the index in the human sciences. Morality is the opposite of nature or more precisely, it has nothing to do with nature, ethics is a loophole in time, it is the product of creation and not evolution! God created it completely because God does not produce and does not praise, but creates, and this confirms the originality of the appearance of man. Morality is not profitable, it is harmful, it is the biggest burden on the owner, and Bernard Mandeville, a professor of English ethics, asked: What is the importance of ethics for the progress of society and the development of civilization? He simply replied: Nothing, perhaps it is harmful. Morality has not yet been mentally demonstrated, and morality and religion are the oldest human ideas, and they have appeared together with man, all of which confirms the authenticity of the human appearance and the abolition of morals that it carries, it is the moment that made a new age. Man moves in life knowing for sure that he is not detailed in the style of Darwin, and therefore constantly rejects the insistence of increasing science that the white race is better than the black, or that the extermination of the disabled and the weak is good for the human race, or that man is a material animal, and this confirms that man can not reject the divine mandate within him, and that atheism is not fit to analyze the phenomenon of human existence! The new humanism comes as a strange confirmation of this matter, it draws non-physical and non-scientific principles, which establish concepts independent of physical existence, and confirms that atheism refuses to be atheism, and that the atheist at the top of his atheism rises above the inevitable materialism, so we may ask: If God does not exist as you claim, why do you wander in his shadows? Why is the attempt to establish a metaphysically tainted Humanian philosophy? If man is the son of matter and matter and matter, why talk about his transcendence or value or centrality? Humianism is a growing assertion that atheism is not fit to analyze the phenomenon of human existence, and that atheism is one thing and man is another. The priests of Western atheistic materialism, apart from these metaphysical visions, have tried to analyze the phenomenon of human existence, and found that man is not considered to be a parasitic being that has nothing to distinguish him, and therefore there have been generalized calls for the elimination of the distinction between humans and animals and insects, and even plants, and the prosecution of anyone exposed to viruses or earthworm, because biologically there is no difference between man and earthworm, they are both of the same degree of qualitative development. As Christopher Manes said, “There is no document to see human beings as superior to others.” In Switzerland, the laws of non-humiliation of plants have emerged.[5] Peter Singer, a professor at Princeton University, says: "A baby's life is no more Darwinian than that of a chimpanzee or a pig."[6] "Marriage and infanticide should be stopped," says American Darwinist James Lee. In September 2010, James Lee was killed when he went to the Discovery Channel site and took three hostages. Francis Fukuyama says in his book The End of History: “Human rights have a deep philosophical problem. We must first understand man before we examine his rights. We understand the nature of man. Modern natural science indicates that there is no difference between man and nature. When we expand the equality that denies the existence of any differences between humans, it can also include denying the existence of important differences between humans and great apes. The fact that people do not care about this equality shows that they still believe in a concept of human superiority, and even the protectors of nature and the protectors of animals, they only defend animals because they love to stay with us, and the mere destruction of them is irreplaceable with the loss of benefits that may be discovered from them in the future, even the protectors of animals are to benefit from them and not for them, and this concept of expanding the equality of human beings has led to our current confusion. Wild, impossible, impossible.” Francis Fukuyama sees equality as impossible within material society, where within this model man is transformed into a contented being with his own happiness, unable to feel ashamed, unable to rise above his needs, and therefore no longer a human being. Isn’t the perfect man in this formula a crude, contemptible being – the utterance of Francis Fukuyama – an intrepid and ambitious being, and here the epic of human existence and the drama of human life is lost. Even Francis Fukuyama describes the atheist at this stage as a dog, Fukuyama says that: Within that world, people will become animals again, as they were before the bloody battle that started with history, the dog is convinced to sleep in the sunlight all day long if they feed him, because he is satisfied with what he is, and he will not worry that other dogs will be better than he is, or that his future as a dog has been frozen or that dogs are in a remote spot. The face of other civilizations where other civilizations are willing to abandon comfort and security, and risk their lives for value. If Humanism seeks to establish its philosophy in the framework of science apart from religion, what if science proves that the white race is better biologically than the black? And that they are higher in the ladder of evolution, will whites and blacks be segregated within the atheistic human society? Or will science and biology be recalcitrant, natural selection recalcitrant, and equality between whites and blacks be the greatest betrayal of evolution and the greatest blow to the materialists? By the way, there are thousands of researches that have proved the superiority of the white race over the black, physically or biologically, including the research of the famous anthropologist Samuel Morton, and the research of Louis Agassiz, who used to say that white people are not murderers when they exterminate the American Indians, but they follow an inevitable issue in the formation of races. What if science proves that men are materially superior to women, and that men are biologically superior to women? Will gender equality be achieved within atheistic society, or will this be an irrational, metaphysically absurd demand that stands in the way of evolution and the imperatives of nature? Incidentally, according to evolutionary literature, women are classified in the animal chain as completely independent of men, whereas men are classified as Homo frontalis, a study of skull size in the 19th century showed a significant difference in brain size in favor of men by 12-19 percent. The size of a woman's brain is almost identical to that of a gorilla, and women are in the lower stage of human development.(12) For Darwin, women are only fit for household tasks, and to delight the home, women are better at home than dogs.(13) This is the atheistic view of man in its true form, atheism has freed its followers from any moral burdens, and if this vision is not adopted in the Humian system, it means the collapse of the basis on which Humianism was built, and thus the extraction of non-material elements from outside the Humian system, will be an acknowledgement of its invalidity as an independent intellectual system to explain the existential significance! World wars have always been the product of atheistic aristocratic societies, and it is atheism that has provided Western imperialism with a theoretical framework for the annihilation of millions in the name of Darwinian material and biological race, and it is not beyond this vision, however much it may pretend otherwise, that Humanism should quietly embrace Adam Smith’s invisible hand, Bentham’s benefit, Marx’s means of production, Freud’s sex, and Nietzsche’s law of force. This is Humanian atheism in practice, and this is the origin of his battle and its slogan and its extinction. In this way, two world wars have annihilated about 120 million people, and were bloody wars that brought both the victor and the vanquished back a third of a century. The two world wars that wiped out about 5% of the world’s population were an atheistic-atheist conflict, and philosophers put a urinal in the center of Paris instead of a statue of the soldier. The famous liberal John Quincy Adams, the former President of the United States, considered the White War against the Indians to be a law of nature, and this law has its very broad application. The eradication of an entire class of people, the emptying of two entire continents of people – the emptying of the Americas from the Indians – would not have happened without the materialistic vision of human existence, and the early liberals considered the extermination of the Indians a kind of legitimate defense, and as a result: the number of Indians decreased from 10 million to 200,000 within a few years, so says Simon Bolevar, editor of Latin America: “It seems that the United States seeks to torture and restrict the continent in the name of freedom.”16 The extermination of millions in the Kulag Archipelago, by the atheist Lenin and the atheist Stalin, is nothing but a communist atheistic justification, and the extermination of 22% of the Cambodian population is nothing but an atheistic justification by Pol Pot, and the establishment of the entire World War is nothing but a German materialist nationalist justification by Adolf Hitler, and the Cultural Revolution in China, which killed 22 million people, is nothing but a Maoist atheistic justification. As Richard Weikart said, “Darwinism, or its naturalistic interpretations, succeeded in turning the balance of morality on its head, and provided the scientific basis for Hitler and his followers to convince themselves and those who collaborated with them that the most heinous of universal crimes was indeed a commendable moral virtue.” But man has a special spirit independent of all creatures; it is not detailed in the style of Darwin, and did not exist for conflict, but exists to worship God from the establishment of the truth whoever followed the truth, whether white or black, but the atheistic materialist mind Humanism has very strictly dismantled humanism has no home for human feelings, and spiritual values. The search for happiness on earth from an atheistic perspective is a form of human ego, which means to say that man is central, that he has a special place in the universe, and a priori it cannot be said that there is a human teleology independent of natural or physical teleology. Belief in the centrality, worth, and transcendence of man comes only through faith in an absolute transcendence of matter, for equality among men is a purely religious matter, and if God does not exist, then people are clearly and hopelessly unequal, and only on the basis of religion can the weak claim equality. Therefore, Dr. Al-Messeri says: God is the infinite and paradoxical installation of the limits of the final given, is the point where man looks at it and achieves transcendence through it, and then in his absence the world turns into a natural material deaf, subject to the laws of movement and becoming that can be surrounded and controlled, and human beings fall into the same pattern, as in the absence of God, man becomes a material quantity that can be manifested and molded. 19]. Man is a creature whose feet are embedded in the mud and whose eyes are visible to the stars. A metaphysical being who asks final questions about the meaning of the universe. The greatest pleasure will not be enough for a man who knows he was born to die. Without a God, all beings lose their limits and their space, and problems arise in the cognitive and moral system, and things lose their limits and identity and are difficult to distinguish between them, as the distinction between good and evil disappears, and the will and ability to overcome disappear and the oneness and inevitability prevail, and Czech President Vakilav Havel summed up this great problem and said his wonderful phrase: "When humanity declared that it is the ruler of the higher world, at this same moment, the human world began to lose." And since the moment man descended from heaven from the heavenly front, man cannot choose to be an innocent animal or be a human being, he could not choose between being an animal or a human being, but his only choice was to be a human being or not a human being. Man is the center and nature is the margin. This is man, and this is his true nature, and Humianism must accept him in this framework, derive transcendental cognitive values, and ignore the Darwinian materialistic view as an analysis of the phenomenon of his existence, which means that it will not become Humianism but a new religion, and at this moment lose its most important features and characteristics, and collapse the Humanian project as a whole. 1- Albro Martin, "James J Hill & Opening of Northwest", Minnesota Historical Society Press (May 1, 1991) pp 414- 15. 2- Williams, Raymond. "Social Darwinism. In Herbert Spencer's Critical Assessment", John Offer 2000. 3- Social Status, p.414-415. 4- Manes, C., Author of Green Rage (1991), quoted in The War on Humans by the Discovery Institute, 18 February 2014: see www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWcEYYj 5- Meg Hamill, "Switzerland Places Ban on the Humiliation of Plants", Planetsave, accessed 1 May 2014. see http://planetsave.com/2008/10/18/switzerland-places-ban-on-the-humiliation-of-plants/ 6- John-Henry Westen, "Princeton Professor Singer: And I repeat, I would kill Disabled Infants", Sep 12, 2006 lifesitenews, accessed 1 May 2014. see http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/princeton-professor-singer-and-i-repeat-i-would-kill-disabled-infants 7- Lauren Effron and Russell Goldman, "Environmental Militant Killed by Police at Discovery Channel Headquarters", Sept. 1, 2010 abcnews. accessed 1 May 2014. see http://abcnews.go.com/US/gunman-enters-discovery-channel-headquarters-employees-evacuated/story?id=11535128 Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Seal of Humans, translated by Hussein Ahmed Amin, first edition 1993, Al-Ahram Center for Translation and Publishing, p. 259, and speaking to him by letter except between (--). 9. Ibid., p. 17. . Source: p. 271. 12- Gould, The Mismeasure of Man, p.105 13- Charles Darwin, "The Autobiography of Charles Darwin 1809-1882", New York pp. 232-233. 14 - Secular partial secular comprehensive Dr. Abdul Wahab Al-Masiri, Dar al-Shorouk 2002, vol. 1 p. 240. 15- Robert Remini, "John Quincy Adams (The American Presidents Series)", Times Books 2002 16 Noam Chomsky, Ideology and Economics, p. 6. 17- Richard Weikart, "From Darwin to Hitler", Palgrave Macmillan 2006, p.215. - Dr. Haitham Talaat. — Source: Brahin Center website - Published 2020-03-30 (archived at the Internet Archive) http://braheen.com:80/mag/2nd/51-humanism-vs-religion