wow...R & NR so soon....interesting
yea...we're obviously jumping around the syllabus a bit lol
yea those are the ideas i kinda got in the textbook....but it really confused me since it wasn't the same as what i was reading in other handouts i'd got + the net etc
"rational" humanism was harder since i couldn't find it on the net...
n yeah i know it's got a real small part in the syllabus, but i think i'm quite confuddled, so if u could take a glimpse through my interpretation that'd be great
------
rational
i kinda got the impression that what it was trying to say that this was the humanism that initially developed, and so at that stage in history God was a dominant part of society.
so this initial form of humanism didn't totally refute God, just associated a less active role with God and emphasised the human capacity to solve problems ladeeda
so i classified this as "religious" or "ethical" humanism, coz from what i was reading...you had ethical culture ( the one that started with the felix adler dude or whatever) and that was kinda humanistic in that it was "functionally" religious & from this emerged religious humanism.
& i thought those characteristics fit rational humanism...
coz i couldn't see how rational humanism could be "secular" if it didn't entirley refute the concept of God......
--- or wait.....it was that [above interpreation ]OR :
....they
did reject the supernatural and transcendant but that this was viewed by some "followers" as a sort of functionally religious thing that provided guidance etc
like a "religion" of humanity
so ..i kinda related it more to the ethical humanism than the secular humanism
am i confused, or am i confused?
so then i thought well
Scientific humanism is "secular" because it totally rejects anything of the transcendant dimension.....