Matt, for 11 years now I have been teaching Human-centered Design (I am a professor of graphic design and design history) It started where I was mentored in the subject by a brilliant fellow named Fred Murrell at the Rocky Mountain College of Art + Design. Since 2013 I’ve been at Central Washington University in Ellensburg, WA. Human-centered design is based on the foundation that the human being should always be kept at the center of all design problems. It is literally marinated in Empathy, which is the core value of the discipline. We teach that true innovation can only occur when the three following things are considered equally: the needs and trends of business, the availability and/or limitations of technology, and most significantly, the needs of human beings. It wasn’t until I listened to this lecture that I realized that I have been teaching a version of manifestation or result maybe of secular humanism. I am astounded. Keep up the good work my friend. Walk out of debates as needed, and don’t be curtailed or intimidated! David (a proud secular humanist)
If you had the ability to bring humans or life onto a deserted planet/universe. It would be better to start with forming life, otherwise humans couldn't even eat or breathe. Therefore life should be the center of existence. However you can't have life without matter and energy, so let's do that first. Mind you they need some type of place holder.. hmm I very got, we'll call it a universe. And then there's time etc etc etc. Look you going have start with some basics. Humans? What were you thinking? Oh if humans already existed? Sounds like circular reasoning to me. Humans exist therefore humans are the center! I wonder if the beliefs of Earth is the center began this way? Probably, so silly of them.
@@banishedbr This is weirdest comment response to the OP. Did you read the comment fully? Did you comprehend it fully? What don't you know about and how does the "gun business" tie in to what was said? Are you trying to say that the business of gun manufacturing and usage needs to pass through the ideology that OP is teaching? If that's so, then why didn't you ask about that? Also, what does "murica is specialized in that (gun business)" have to do with the OP? Really bizarre take and response.
Sometimes i am not comfortable with your methods , however i always agree with your position and i am glad you keep doing your thing , regardless of your critics , including me every now and then. I have learned so much from you about these issues and grateful for your guidance .
I have adopted secular humanism values and am happy to tell anyone about that fact whenever I can. I try to live up to the secular humanist ideals every day.
Excellent. I'm a member of Humanists UK which, among other things, currently seeks to gain recognition for humanist marriage & to promote inclusive public education (countering discrimination by religious groups). Fairness, compassion, empathy & "seeking happiness in this life and helping others to do the same" (Humanists UK) - sounds _good_ to me 😀
Being an atheist and secular humanist from the very religious and very conservative state of Alabama. I've always felt like moving away from the atheist label and roll with the humanist label. Even though I'm against labels myself. I just feel being labeled an atheist hurts the cause due to the fact that atheist has and likely will always be tied to evil, due to the religious lifestyles of alot of Americans, especially here in the south. Even though it's gained alot of ground over the last 20+ years. If we're gonna go with a label, then going with secular humanist would likely recieve more of a welcoming and wouldn't have the stigma that the atheist label brings with it. I could be wrong, but to me it just seems like a more positive direction to take. These Atheist Debates videos have been great today. Really enjoyed them!
I've met a number of people from the south who think dark skinned people will always be associated with evil. Maybe just try owning an atheist label proudly and let the evil minded be damned. Plenty of evil is attached to the theists label but has that made you think of evil each time someone embraces it ? Probably not.
@@MrCanis4 You and your text there are proof of a creator and creation relationship. Score is now 1 - 0 for a thing with a creator to a thin without a creator. Now do what the first comment said, not the reverse of it.
@@JohnSmith-fn5en You just proved nothing. I exist. I don't need a "Creator" for that. Now, try to convince me that you DO need a Creator. And, NO, "Because I exist" is not proof. You can have a 10-0 in your head as much as you want. Doesn't mean anything to me. And 'Now do what the first comment said, not the reverse of it'. I don't give a damn about those words.
@@MrCanis4 Clearly you needed a mother and a father who created you or you would not exist. You named another thing with creators. You were suppose to do the opposite. 2-0
...but how can you not believe in God because of trees and the sky and the sun and the moon! Just kidding. Practice saying 'I don't know why and neither do you.' And just be happy to be alive in 2025! Happy New Year!
Saw Matt playing video games 45 minutes before the show, Matt is unbelievably smart to say all this on a whim. Matt is my #1 source for logic thinking.
Well as far as I know from what Matt had said before he actually posts these after he's thought about the topic for some time and once he knows it really well then has an unscripted talk. He doesn't on a whim think of a topic and then talk about it immediately (I could be wrong of course about this vid in particular, but in general I know he usually mulls it over before recording anything).
@@winterunterseher8937 I can see he has notes, and prepares in advance, but to even not get nervous and gather final thoughts, he is good, he knows his shit and my #1 source.
Hi Matt, Thanks for all the great videos / Talks & debates. Personally, I am a "UK" Secular Humanist. Just to be different !! And still a big Fan. All the best. Paul C.
The value of secular humanism to me is that it makes ME responsible for the reasons and consequences of my own actions. And it makes ME be a good person simply for the sake of being a good person, because I know it's right. It also reassures me that have at least SOME objectively true reasons for believing the things I have in my head.
Even though I was immersed in the version of Christianity espoused by the Southern Baptist, I remember telling my parents when I was quite young (58 now) that I was a "secular humanist". I can't remember, but they might have fallen out of their chairs. As you might suspect I was, for a time, distracted by the smoke and mirrors of religious though, but I was never really dissuaded from the notion that as a human with an properly functioning brain and with the tools of right reasoning and intellectual honesty, I should be able to make decisions and shape a system of values that would maximize my happiness and well being while still affording others the same opportunity. When my humanism conflicted with the proscribed religious believe, I picked the humanist notion. When I was inevitably pressed with religious dogma or psychological manipulations, I responded with "I'm not convinced." As long as proscription remains in the unreal world of religion, laissez faire, but once it crosses into the world of actual things like how I live in my one and only body, who I can consort with or how I can live my one and only life, well then, Imagonna have a few things to say about that.
Matt, on New Year’s Eve, I visited YT and very deliberately, systematically unsubscribed from various atheist and debunk channels, and I told YT I was “not interested” in others it was populating into my feed as it tried to figure out how to keep me watching. I’ve been watching this kind of stuff for over a year, and I feel I’ve gotten my fill, especially of the negativity. And I’ve really grown tired of hearing the arguments of fools - I fear the overexposure to their ideas is going to make me stupider. In short, I need some positive ideas and intelligence around me. And so I’m glad, just as I was about to tell YT not to suggest your channel to me again, that I read the title of this video. That was a good way to spend 22 minutes, and frankly a surprise coming from you. I’ve seen your public debates and I admire your skill at it, but usually I avoid your channel because you get so aggressive with low-info religious callers - it’s just so jarring. I like the calm you exude in this video. If you have others like it, I’d like to know where to find them. If not, please make more. I’ll stick around where there are good ideas to think about, and where I don’t have to give any more of my time to ideas I’ve left behind, e.g. God and religion.
@@PonyboyGarfunkel Humans are an emotional species. Whilst we learn to reason effectively we are still not robots. Irate/frustrated? Whatever the best words are. However it's not ignore or think of these outdated beliefs are equal when they cause harm to themselves or others.
I've been calling myself secular humanist for some years now. In my opinion all secular humanism means is "Irrespective of if a god exists, we should come together and help eachother". God isn't really a focus nor a subject.
If pushed I would definitely call myself a secular humanist. I suppose the main reason I avoid actively using it, or almost any label, is conflict avoidance. I know too many people who hear a label and will only act in accordance to what they think that label means, with no interest on what you think or want to convey when using it. I know a distressingly high number of people who will insist that you MUST mean what they think the label means, no discussion. So it's just been easier for me to explain my positions in greater detail from the outset and let them pick the labels they want to assign.
7:23 If we can keep correcting ourselves as humans, doesn't that point to an ultimate 'goodness' that we're moving towards eventually? If we become less wrong with every step then there must be a state or being which is perfect. This would be the 'source' or 'light' which you would call God.
The only reason I reject the label of secular humanist is because the manifestos explicitly mention only one singular species. Humans are no more intrinsically or inherently important than any other species. We just happen to lack the intelligence to control our own population while adapting to our environment. We’ve become so well adapted that our arrogance has led us to knowingly wreck our environment to the point where continuing adaptive changes may not be able to happen fast enough to save most of the species on the planet, including humans. Recognizing that, when it comes to most of the current problems on our Earth, including the unnecessary extinction of innumerable other species, we are to blame, leads me to have very little sympathy for the human condition. Homo sapiens are part of the environment for most other species, and we are responsible for changinging it so fast that the inability of other animals to adapt is almost strictly our fault. Just like with religion, if there is something that can be classified as “unnatural,” humans are the root cause, and natural selection more and more often favours extinction.
I agree with Humansts UK - "We support the bodily integrity of all people as an inalienable human right... We do not support non-medically necessary procedures to remove parts of the genitals of boys and girls and want to see all laws allowing such procedures repealed..."
There is no objective or subjective morality. Morality is just an interior compass which points towards an inevitable true nord which coincidentally is the idealistic society cunstracted under the vail of ignorance. I'm so glad that I'm not alone in this thought.
Humanist then secular indeed. I like to say "a citizen of the world" then explain that the most recurrent ideas tend towards humanism (caring for others) etc. Hard to not - atleast - pretend to be (now thats interesting because we get to the lies that people dont realize are lies: being religious often means supporting certain proposition in said books). Yes, a lot of people pretend to be good people and dont realize They're Not. Neglect opens the door for ignorance to take hold as you defend something that doesnt need to be defended... taking a humble stance is far more comfortable. Removes the stress and avoids turning yourself into a self-deceiving liar (apologetics).
Presumably, humanism would be concerned with human suffering and thus be concerned with the very procreation that produces it. Even so, I've yet to hear a humanist publicly link the two phenomena. It's not as if the humanist would have to be an antinatalist in order to do that much.
Secularism has nothing to do with proving atheism correct and religion incorrect. You can't say you have to be rational and reality based on your beliefs and then say I'm a secular humanist. There is a page using your video calling themselves secular humanists and yet all they do is bash on religion. So much for the humanism part.
This is outside the point of this video, so please ignore it if you don't care. It's about Rawls. The veil of ignorance doesn't necessarily eliminate bias, at least not for certain strengths of commitment and types of beliefs. Like if a man believes in a strict gender hierarchy, he could very well say that he still wants that from behind the veil. If he turns out to be a woman in this new society, then so be it, a gender hierarchy is still best (in his view) because women are lower than men whether he is one or not. Likewise for a racist, an ableist, a patriot, etc. A liberal (lowercase L) might very much disagree with a socialist from behind the veil because one values individualism and the other collectivism. The thought experiment invites us to try to throw off those biases, but since we always really remain unveiled and in our own positionality, we are always biased.
Veil of ignorance doesn't work if it's not applied. In your gender hierarchy example the man saying 'so be it' implies that he does not really like the world where HE is lower class citizen. Just because it's easy to state, does not mean it's easy to practice. Have a trolley problem for example. Depending on how it's phrased, most people want to rather kill 5 people than just one person, but would prefer a world where the chance of being killed by trolley is reduced by 80% for everyone.
You should look up Mexican Humanism, the governing philosophy of our current ruling party. Mexico is having a moment here, and it's a model the left can learn from.
The reason I can’t identify as a secular humanist is because I don’t know what it is. I’ve heard Matt and other self-identified secular humanists express positions I don’t agree with while insisting that that’s secular humanism. The basics and broad principles sound fine and good, but when I hear those positions it makes me ask myself, “Do I disagree because I’m a bad secular humanist, or do I disagree because I’m a better secular humanist than they are?” I don’t know how to tell the difference. If I did, I might be a secular humanist, and it might turn out I was one all along.
Been an atheist my entire life - the phrase ‘secular humanism’ means nothing to me. I’m simply somebody who never had a divine revelation - and somebody who doesn’t think the Jews were chosen by the prime mover, that Jesus rose from the dead, that the angel Gabriel recited the Koran to a caravan bandit or who believes any of the Hindu deities are real.
Why stop at humanism, and why not consider the value of all sentient life? Secular Humanism is great except for privileging your own species in the same manner others privilege their own race, ethnicity, gender, etc.
@@robinhood20253 Thus with respect to biological sex, one is either male or female. Individuals that have the two types of gonads, either occurring together or alternating, are called hermaphrodites…checkmate
if your plan requires the world in lockstep but does not have an ethical way to achieve this? you do not have an ethical plan. what good is living in Heaven if you had to expand Hell to get there?
If someone could sum up secular humanism for me in 1-3 sentences, that would be lovely. What is it? For example, I'm an anti-tribalist. My definition of anti-tribalism would be "resistance against the human tendency to divide into ideologically homogeneous echo chambers and warring tribes."
It's a moral framework that doesn't start by assuming god. Golden principle of some sort, empathy and equality. It's more of a goals and methods, but those methods are suspect to revision. Just like science isn't just a list of facts - it's a method to figure out the facts; secular morality should be about how to make humanity flourish.
Pssst, there's this awesome thing called the internet... Just messing with you, but really, it's so easy to look stuff up it makes you look kind of lazy. Here it is in a silver platter: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_humanism
From Humanists UK - "trusts to the scientific method when it comes to understanding how the universe works and rejects the idea of the supernatural... makes their ethical decisions based on reason, empathy, and a concern for human beings and other sentient animals... human beings can act to give their own lives meaning by seeking happiness in this life and helping others to do the same."
I have a question about humanists. If we finally find extraterrestrial life who are more intelligent than humans, more physically capable than humans, and overll a much stronger psychology of humans, IF we had a choice of saving say grandpa over a dozen of these extraterrestrials, why should we save grandpa? Kinda the trolley experiment with a group of advanced extraterrestrials on the other track. Each species prefer their own kind. Ants prefer ants, elelephants prefer elephants, humans prefer humans etc. As such, you wouldn't have a worry in the world being dropped into a school of sharks, if you were a shark, as they prefer your company. So too must a claimed supernatural species, prefer supernatural kinds. A claimed God would save a claimed Devil over any other species, as they are of the same kind. Humans would just be like sheep to them (well the religious). I've seen movies where the advanced 'alien' dies, but the human survives and everyone is ok with that. It doesn't seem right. Why is the advanced species less important than humans? Aren't they better? Humanists would attack other species, even if they are better than us. Humanists can't be trusted with better or worse. They are biased for their own species survival, even in front of claimed Gods.
@tulpas93 my single concern. 1. Humanists clearly prefer the good of humans. 2. However they are not good for other species. (Caring for animals etc. is not at the same compassionate level). 3. Therefore a hypothetical advanced species would also have less care from humans. 4. Hypothetically we'd destroy their entire population over saving possibly even 1 human! 5. Humans cannot be trusted with advanced (hypothetical) species. Including claimed supernatural species. A humanist can never praise a claimed God over even an individual human! Humanists should not be religious whilst human.
I don't like labels. I don't even usually call myself an atheist, although I will freely state that there are not now nor have there ever been any gods. So I'm not going to call myself a secular humanist.
Veganism is the more consistent extension of humanism to all sentient entities, and not weaponizing the same arbitrary prejudice pejorative against other species.
the term "cult" is artificially interjected w negative connotations because ppl don't understand that every alliance based on a prescribed theology w the intent to express to the world is a cult. Similar to how negative connotations are artificially attributed to the word "judgement"... the function required for decision making which determines our survival. There are layers upon layers of cults carefully interwoven into the fabric of society. Church and state have always been at the forefront of Cult Culture. So much so, that Church and state are innocuously considered unassailable establishment... Because they are the most effective cults. You are accepted only if you submit to their paradigms. You are rejected if u deny their paradigms. Any system or theology which opposes or circumvents the existing Cult of Church and State is given the "label" of CULT... Which dehumanizes the opposing theology, giving guiltless permission to the CULT of Church and state to "righteously annihilate" the divergent theology. "Citizens"(sla ves) are given numbers like bar codes, because we are a product to them... not a person.
@@albaniahenry-franklin2829 your inability to extract usable information out of my post reflects more of your limitations of understanding then limitations within my post. I'll spoon feed it to you. Society is saturated in CULTS.... There you go!!!! 😘
@albaniahenry-franklin2829 objective reality does not superimpose its objectivity on a subjective mind which objectively exists. A mind objectively existing does not interfere w the fact that the minds perception & perspective is RELATIVE. THERE IS OBJECTIVE REALITY. HOWEVER, ONES PERCEPTION OF THAT OBJECTIVE REALITY IS SUBJECTIVE.
From my perspective, I should not respect a humanist if he isn't willing to publicly acknowledge that every human being is a victim in the context that is existential. The human being is forced to exist and forced to suffer the consequences.
That’s called perspective brother, I choose to acknowledge I was brought into this world unwillingly, yet I can try to make my life the most beneficial to others based on humanistic values
@@spencertalan2563 If it can be said that any of us are respectable, it's not because we demonstrate an intellectual transparency in public. Certainly we _don't_ demonstrate that.
@ it was supposed to be a jab against Matt’s “well I’m not convinced” he likes to say. Never realized he started growing a beard tho, maybe he’ll become an Orthodox priest!
@@BobbyFriston *"What do you mean by "stillness"?"* Stillness is what exists between "you" and "mean" in your sentence. Why is it that TRUE *stillness* frightens you so? 🤣🤣
As soon as you try to name the ONE TRUE CREATOR, you just separated it from every other name within CREATION, invalidating it from being the ONE TRUE CREATOR.... 😂😂😂😂😂
@DiMadHatter u do u, Homie. I'm not telling u what to believe. I'm just telling u what I think. My theology is a working theory, not a dogmatic restriction.
@@albaniahenry-franklin2829 aren't u just contentious? 😂 atheists can be so hard to please. Isn't it nice to hear a theist say "my leanings are open to change?".... well... can't make everyone happy....
The one true CREATOR has no need of demands, (commandments) for he has the power of CREATION. Any limits he wished imposed are built into the fabric of CREATION, such as scientific natural Laws.
All creation is built upon emptiness. Just ask the atom. Darkness created the light. Darkness is the scaffold on which Light is allowed expression. Darkness is the medium on which Light is painted. Mycelium is the physical mechanism which connects all life. Light (physical) mycelium facilitates the continuum of physical creation. Light mycelium is a fractal extension of Dark mycelium, which facilitates the continuum of the eternal Dark Void. Light does not move. DARKNESS carries the LIGHT. Light is not propelled forth from stars... Light is pulled on a escalater of Darkness by the eternal dark void. The "speed of light" is actually the "pressure of Darkness". This measure is directly related to the dimension of a given universe. All of the infinite universes which comprise the OMNI-VERSE exist at the same time & place simultaneously. This is the ALL-SPARK WITHIN THE INFINITE DARK VOID. This is the CO-CREATOR WITHIN THE GOD-HOOD.
"our perception of the ONE TRUE CREATOR is a perfect CREATOR & created all things".... also Christians, "our perfect Creator of ALL THINGS only has 1 PERFECT CREATION.... within the NEAR INFINITE CREATIONS IN EXISTENCE..." 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 this would actually make Yahweh statistically the worst CREATOR in existence. the fruit of a PERFECT CREATOR is PERFECT CREATIONS. You say Yahweh CREATED FREE WILL & KNOWLEDGE... but then your dogma is taken to demonize FREE WILL & KNOWLEDGE... As if these are somehow themselves imperfect creations, or are the interface through which creations are made imperfect. (Through Sin)either way, it is the fruit of an imperfect CREATOR. You say Yahweh created ALL THINGS... But then Yahweh claims to be vengeful & jealous... logically... to that which CREATED ALL THINGS, there is nothing to be vengeful or jealous of, FOR HE IS ALL THINGS. Yahweh is a desert war god of hypocrisy, not the ONE TRUE CREATOR. The actual ONE TRUE CREATOR is intrinsically connected to every quanta of CREATION. TO say there is a CREATION not connected to the actual ONE TRUE CREATOR is to proclaim the limits of your understanding, not the actual limits of CREATION. UNITY is the inalienable quality of CREATION... not DIVISION & SEPERATION.... as is so insisted upon by the broken Theology of Abraham. Your contrived Dogmas offer slavery & manipulation tactics which use mass Stockholm syndrome & mass psychosis to coerce CO-CREATORS into relinquishing their DIVINE SOVEREIGNTY unto SYSTEMS which insidiously abuse this Gift... such as church and state. WE ARE ALL DIVINE SOVEREIGNTY. I am the BRIGHTEST NIGHT. I am the DARKEST LIGHT.... & I am ASCENDING.
Maybe this is the perfect 'Creator' (Lol) design, it's just going to take a trillion years to get there. However you'd require evidence of a Creator, I wouldn't believe in your guess.
I like the UU churches.. Belief in the supernatural is not expected to be involved in the community. They support humanist principles and separation of church and state.
Matt, for 11 years now I have been teaching Human-centered Design (I am a professor of graphic design and design history) It started where I was mentored in the subject by a brilliant fellow named Fred Murrell at the Rocky Mountain College of Art + Design. Since 2013 I’ve been at Central Washington University in Ellensburg, WA. Human-centered design is based on the foundation that the human being should always be kept at the center of all design problems. It is literally marinated in Empathy, which is the core value of the discipline. We teach that true innovation can only occur when the three following things are considered equally: the needs and trends of business, the availability and/or limitations of technology, and most significantly, the needs of human beings. It wasn’t until I listened to this lecture that I realized that I have been teaching a version of manifestation or result maybe of secular humanism. I am astounded.
Keep up the good work my friend. Walk out of debates as needed, and don’t be curtailed or intimidated!
David (a proud secular humanist)
idk about that, just think the guns BUSINESS, what do they need ? murica is specialized in that.
If you had the ability to bring humans or life onto a deserted planet/universe. It would be better to start with forming life, otherwise humans couldn't even eat or breathe.
Therefore life should be the center of existence.
However you can't have life without matter and energy, so let's do that first.
Mind you they need some type of place holder.. hmm I very got, we'll call it a universe.
And then there's time etc etc etc.
Look you going have start with some basics. Humans? What were you thinking?
Oh if humans already existed?
Sounds like circular reasoning to me. Humans exist therefore humans are the center! I wonder if the beliefs of Earth is the center began this way? Probably, so silly of them.
@@banishedbr This is weirdest comment response to the OP. Did you read the comment fully? Did you comprehend it fully? What don't you know about and how does the "gun business" tie in to what was said? Are you trying to say that the business of gun manufacturing and usage needs to pass through the ideology that OP is teaching? If that's so, then why didn't you ask about that? Also, what does "murica is specialized in that (gun business)" have to do with the OP? Really bizarre take and response.
Sometimes i am not comfortable with your methods , however i always agree with your position and i am glad you keep doing your thing , regardless of your critics , including me every now and then. I have learned so much from you about these issues and grateful for your guidance .
I have adopted secular humanism values and am happy to tell anyone about that fact whenever I can. I try to live up to the secular humanist ideals every day.
❤
Thank you
Excellent. I'm a member of Humanists UK which, among other things, currently seeks to gain recognition for humanist marriage & to promote inclusive public education (countering discrimination by religious groups). Fairness, compassion, empathy & "seeking happiness in this life and helping others to do the same" (Humanists UK) - sounds _good_ to me 😀
Thank you Matt. I found this very helpful and inspiring to me.
Being an atheist and secular humanist from the very religious and very conservative state of Alabama. I've always felt like moving away from the atheist label and roll with the humanist label. Even though I'm against labels myself. I just feel being labeled an atheist hurts the cause due to the fact that atheist has and likely will always be tied to evil, due to the religious lifestyles of alot of Americans, especially here in the south. Even though it's gained alot of ground over the last 20+ years. If we're gonna go with a label, then going with secular humanist would likely recieve more of a welcoming and wouldn't have the stigma that the atheist label brings with it. I could be wrong, but to me it just seems like a more positive direction to take. These Atheist Debates videos have been great today. Really enjoyed them!
Us gay people used to say the same thing about the G-word. Turns out that’s bullsh-t.
Why stop at just 'Humanist' why not extend your morality to other species as well?
I've met a number of people from the south who think dark skinned people will always be associated with evil.
Maybe just try owning an atheist label proudly and let the evil minded be damned.
Plenty of evil is attached to the theists label but has that made you think of evil each time someone embraces it ?
Probably not.
Freeing myself of religion, becoming an atheist has done for my soul than any Church or belief ever could.
Heck yeah friend, thats the truth. ❤
Matt at his best.
Explaining ideas and opinions.
Yet he can't name a single thing without a creator and any time he tries he only names things with creator.
@@JohnSmith-fn5en Prove that.
Without using an old storybook, because we do not accept that as Evidence.
@@MrCanis4 You and your text there are proof of a creator and creation relationship.
Score is now 1 - 0 for a thing with a creator to a thin without a creator.
Now do what the first comment said, not the reverse of it.
@@JohnSmith-fn5en
You just proved nothing.
I exist. I don't need a "Creator" for that. Now, try to convince me that you DO need a Creator. And, NO, "Because I exist" is not proof.
You can have a 10-0 in your head as much as you want. Doesn't mean anything to me.
And 'Now do what the first comment said, not the reverse of it'.
I don't give a damn about those words.
@@MrCanis4 Clearly you needed a mother and a father who created you or you would not exist.
You named another thing with creators.
You were suppose to do the opposite.
2-0
...but how can you not believe in God because of trees and the sky and the sun and the moon! Just kidding. Practice saying 'I don't know why and neither do you.' And just be happy to be alive in 2025! Happy New Year!
👍🤣
But god is a flat rectangle shaped unicorn fart. How can you deny what you know in your heart is true.
Saw Matt playing video games 45 minutes before the show, Matt is unbelievably smart to say all this on a whim. Matt is my #1 source for logic thinking.
Well as far as I know from what Matt had said before he actually posts these after he's thought about the topic for some time and once he knows it really well then has an unscripted talk. He doesn't on a whim think of a topic and then talk about it immediately (I could be wrong of course about this vid in particular, but in general I know he usually mulls it over before recording anything).
@@winterunterseher8937 I can see he has notes, and prepares in advance, but to even not get nervous and gather final thoughts, he is good, he knows his shit and my #1 source.
From a cosmic perspective, I find that secular humanism to be the most inclusive group after our earthling membership. 🖖🏻
Hi Matt, Thanks for all the great videos / Talks & debates. Personally, I am a "UK" Secular Humanist. Just to be different !! And still a big Fan. All the best. Paul C.
Happy new year Matt
The value of secular humanism to me is that it makes ME responsible for the reasons and consequences of my own actions. And it makes ME be a good person simply for the sake of being a good person, because I know it's right. It also reassures me that have at least SOME objectively true reasons for believing the things I have in my head.
Very well said ♥️
Always a pleasure to listen to your videos, guess what I'm a secular humanist and proud of it
how does one acquire a transcript of this content? i need to chew on it a bit. brilliant, thankyou
Description- More, you'll see the link marked Transcript.
I'm more of a secular misanthrope, but I would support a secular humanist government since it would likely be in my own best interest. 😅
Even though I was immersed in the version of Christianity espoused by the Southern Baptist, I remember telling my parents when I was quite young (58 now) that I was a "secular humanist". I can't remember, but they might have fallen out of their chairs. As you might suspect I was, for a time, distracted by the smoke and mirrors of religious though, but I was never really dissuaded from the notion that as a human with an properly functioning brain and with the tools of right reasoning and intellectual honesty, I should be able to make decisions and shape a system of values that would maximize my happiness and well being while still affording others the same opportunity. When my humanism conflicted with the proscribed religious believe, I picked the humanist notion. When I was inevitably pressed with religious dogma or psychological manipulations, I responded with "I'm not convinced."
As long as proscription remains in the unreal world of religion, laissez faire, but once it crosses into the world of actual things like how I live in my one and only body, who I can consort with or how I can live my one and only life, well then, Imagonna have a few things to say about that.
Beautiful, Matt!!!!!!
Matt, on New Year’s Eve, I visited YT and very deliberately, systematically unsubscribed from various atheist and debunk channels, and I told YT I was “not interested” in others it was populating into my feed as it tried to figure out how to keep me watching. I’ve been watching this kind of stuff for over a year, and I feel I’ve gotten my fill, especially of the negativity. And I’ve really grown tired of hearing the arguments of fools - I fear the overexposure to their ideas is going to make me stupider. In short, I need some positive ideas and intelligence around me. And so I’m glad, just as I was about to tell YT not to suggest your channel to me again, that I read the title of this video. That was a good way to spend 22 minutes, and frankly a surprise coming from you. I’ve seen your public debates and I admire your skill at it, but usually I avoid your channel because you get so aggressive with low-info religious callers - it’s just so jarring. I like the calm you exude in this video. If you have others like it, I’d like to know where to find them. If not, please make more. I’ll stick around where there are good ideas to think about, and where I don’t have to give any more of my time to ideas I’ve left behind, e.g. God and religion.
How do you feel about people, possibly family, believing you'll burn? For eternity!
Equals?
I'd probably get irate at their unsubstantiated beliefs.
@@kimsland999 >"I'd probably get irate at their unsubstantiated beliefs."
@@PonyboyGarfunkel Humans are an emotional species.
Whilst we learn to reason effectively we are still not robots.
Irate/frustrated? Whatever the best words are. However it's not ignore or think of these outdated beliefs are equal when they cause harm to themselves or others.
@@kimsland999 Human nature, in total, does not change. There isn't a future populated by "right" thinking people.
I suggest looking into genetically modified skeptic. He’s very positive and calm.
Wow 2 videos released in one day, what a treat
3
I've been calling myself secular humanist for some years now.
In my opinion all secular humanism means is "Irrespective of if a god exists, we should come together and help eachother".
God isn't really a focus nor a subject.
If pushed I would definitely call myself a secular humanist. I suppose the main reason I avoid actively using it, or almost any label, is conflict avoidance. I know too many people who hear a label and will only act in accordance to what they think that label means, with no interest on what you think or want to convey when using it. I know a distressingly high number of people who will insist that you MUST mean what they think the label means, no discussion. So it's just been easier for me to explain my positions in greater detail from the outset and let them pick the labels they want to assign.
7:23 If we can keep correcting ourselves as humans, doesn't that point to an ultimate 'goodness' that we're moving towards eventually? If we become less wrong with every step then there must be a state or being which is perfect. This would be the 'source' or 'light' which you would call God.
We'll never reach an 'ultimate', therefore no god 🙂
Thanks, shipmate!
Finally the one that caused Matt to give up religion, is announced.
A great one.
Ur awesome matt😊
The only reason I reject the label of secular humanist is because the manifestos explicitly mention only one singular species. Humans are no more intrinsically or inherently important than any other species. We just happen to lack the intelligence to control our own population while adapting to our environment. We’ve become so well adapted that our arrogance has led us to knowingly wreck our environment to the point where continuing adaptive changes may not be able to happen fast enough to save most of the species on the planet, including humans. Recognizing that, when it comes to most of the current problems on our Earth, including the unnecessary extinction of innumerable other species, we are to blame, leads me to have very little sympathy for the human condition. Homo sapiens are part of the environment for most other species, and we are responsible for changinging it so fast that the inability of other animals to adapt is almost strictly our fault. Just like with religion, if there is something that can be classified as “unnatural,” humans are the root cause, and natural selection more and more often favours extinction.
What are secular humanisms thoughts on circumcising children?
My thoughts as a secular humanist is that it is a barbaric practice and a violation of bodily autonomy .
I agree with Humansts UK - "We support the bodily integrity of all people as an inalienable human right... We do not support non-medically necessary procedures to remove parts of the genitals of boys and girls and want to see all laws allowing such procedures repealed..."
Amazing.
Matt! Could you please make a video commenting on the Carson & Huff Debate?
do come live sometime sir
He does a live show almost weekly on The Line Network
@@RoozleDoozle-9210 line network what is it
@@phazezio5594if you look up qnaline it will show you the channel, it’s a call in show and Matt is one of the hosts of it.
There is no objective or subjective morality. Morality is just an interior compass which points towards an inevitable true nord which coincidentally is the idealistic society cunstracted under the vail of ignorance. I'm so glad that I'm not alone in this thought.
It's great to know your subjective view on morality! 😊
@tulpas93 yeah, every opinion is subjective by definition. Thankfully morality is not like that.
Suggest _"veil_ of ignorance" 🙂
Good stuff
I like secular humanism but like to take it a bit further to include non human animals as well, they matter too
Hey! Can i know how to answer religious people saying that god is timeless, beyond the physics, omnipotent etc etc so he doesnt need a cause
Ask them to prove it.
Hey Matt what shows are you on and what times in general I have some moral questions I’d love to talk about in person
Humanist then secular indeed. I like to say "a citizen of the world" then explain that the most recurrent ideas tend towards humanism (caring for others) etc. Hard to not - atleast - pretend to be (now thats interesting because we get to the lies that people dont realize are lies: being religious often means supporting certain proposition in said books). Yes, a lot of people pretend to be good people and dont realize They're Not. Neglect opens the door for ignorance to take hold as you defend something that doesnt need to be defended... taking a humble stance is far more comfortable. Removes the stress and avoids turning yourself into a self-deceiving liar (apologetics).
Presumably, humanism would be concerned with human suffering and thus be concerned with the very procreation that produces it. Even so, I've yet to hear a humanist publicly link the two phenomena.
It's not as if the humanist would have to be an antinatalist in order to do that much.
I've tried stating I'm a humanist a few times, and been told off for being speciesist and immoral ..
Secularism has nothing to do with proving atheism correct and religion incorrect. You can't say you have to be rational and reality based on your beliefs and then say I'm a secular humanist. There is a page using your video calling themselves secular humanists and yet all they do is bash on religion. So much for the humanism part.
This is outside the point of this video, so please ignore it if you don't care. It's about Rawls.
The veil of ignorance doesn't necessarily eliminate bias, at least not for certain strengths of commitment and types of beliefs. Like if a man believes in a strict gender hierarchy, he could very well say that he still wants that from behind the veil. If he turns out to be a woman in this new society, then so be it, a gender hierarchy is still best (in his view) because women are lower than men whether he is one or not. Likewise for a racist, an ableist, a patriot, etc. A liberal (lowercase L) might very much disagree with a socialist from behind the veil because one values individualism and the other collectivism. The thought experiment invites us to try to throw off those biases, but since we always really remain unveiled and in our own positionality, we are always biased.
Veil of ignorance doesn't work if it's not applied. In your gender hierarchy example the man saying 'so be it' implies that he does not really like the world where HE is lower class citizen.
Just because it's easy to state, does not mean it's easy to practice. Have a trolley problem for example. Depending on how it's phrased, most people want to rather kill 5 people than just one person, but would prefer a world where the chance of being killed by trolley is reduced by 80% for everyone.
Damn! That beard grew back fast!!!!
I'm a secular humanist.
❤
You should look up Mexican Humanism, the governing philosophy of our current ruling party. Mexico is having a moment here, and it's a model the left can learn from.
The reason I can’t identify as a secular humanist is because I don’t know what it is. I’ve heard Matt and other self-identified secular humanists express positions I don’t agree with while insisting that that’s secular humanism. The basics and broad principles sound fine and good, but when I hear those positions it makes me ask myself, “Do I disagree because I’m a bad secular humanist, or do I disagree because I’m a better secular humanist than they are?” I don’t know how to tell the difference. If I did, I might be a secular humanist, and it might turn out I was one all along.
Been an atheist my entire life - the phrase ‘secular humanism’ means nothing to me. I’m simply somebody who never had a divine revelation - and somebody who doesn’t think the Jews were chosen by the prime mover, that Jesus rose from the dead, that the angel Gabriel recited the Koran to a caravan bandit or who believes any of the Hindu deities are real.
SH 4 life 😅
Why stop at humanism, and why not consider the value of all sentient life? Secular Humanism is great except for privileging your own species in the same manner others privilege their own race, ethnicity, gender, etc.
I still love Asimov
I also got banned from the line for saying there are two sexes and an infinite number of genders
Have you heard of intersex people?
@@robinhood20253 Thus with respect to biological sex, one is either male or female. Individuals that have the two types of gonads, either occurring together or alternating, are called hermaphrodites…checkmate
@yedder7628 How did they justify your ban?
666th view. Nothing magical, though
Matt. Can you please decide how long your beard is?
As a secular humanist, Matt is not required to decide such a thing. His beard will be as long as it is long.
if your plan requires the world in lockstep but does not have an ethical way to achieve this? you do not have an ethical plan. what good is living in Heaven if you had to expand Hell to get there?
Heaven and hell don't exist
Say what?!
I mean, I recognize your use of words but perhaps you could arrange them coherently?
Good luck!
If someone could sum up secular humanism for me in 1-3 sentences, that would be lovely. What is it?
For example, I'm an anti-tribalist. My definition of anti-tribalism would be "resistance against the human tendency to divide into ideologically homogeneous echo chambers and warring tribes."
It's a moral framework that doesn't start by assuming god. Golden principle of some sort, empathy and equality. It's more of a goals and methods, but those methods are suspect to revision.
Just like science isn't just a list of facts - it's a method to figure out the facts; secular morality should be about how to make humanity flourish.
Pssst, there's this awesome thing called the internet...
Just messing with you, but really, it's so easy to look stuff up it makes you look kind of lazy.
Here it is in a silver platter:
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_humanism
From Humanists UK - "trusts to the scientific method when it comes to understanding how the universe works and rejects the idea of the supernatural... makes their ethical decisions based on reason, empathy, and a concern for human beings and other sentient animals... human beings can act to give their own lives meaning by seeking happiness in this life and helping others to do the same."
I have a question about humanists.
If we finally find extraterrestrial life who are more intelligent than humans, more physically capable than humans, and overll a much stronger psychology of humans, IF we had a choice of saving say grandpa over a dozen of these extraterrestrials, why should we save grandpa?
Kinda the trolley experiment with a group of advanced extraterrestrials on the other track.
Each species prefer their own kind. Ants prefer ants, elelephants prefer elephants, humans prefer humans etc.
As such, you wouldn't have a worry in the world being dropped into a school of sharks, if you were a shark, as they prefer your company.
So too must a claimed supernatural species, prefer supernatural kinds.
A claimed God would save a claimed Devil over any other species, as they are of the same kind. Humans would just be like sheep to them (well the religious).
I've seen movies where the advanced 'alien' dies, but the human survives and everyone is ok with that.
It doesn't seem right.
Why is the advanced species less important than humans? Aren't they better?
Humanists would attack other species, even if they are better than us. Humanists can't be trusted with better or worse. They are biased for their own species survival, even in front of claimed Gods.
You're getting ahead of yourself.
Let's deal with the hypotheticals as they reify.
@tulpas93 my single concern.
1. Humanists clearly prefer the good of humans.
2. However they are not good for other species. (Caring for animals etc. is not at the same compassionate level).
3. Therefore a hypothetical advanced species would also have less care from humans.
4. Hypothetically we'd destroy their entire population over saving possibly even 1 human!
5. Humans cannot be trusted with advanced (hypothetical) species. Including claimed supernatural species.
A humanist can never praise a claimed God over even an individual human!
Humanists should not be religious whilst human.
@tulpas93 I did but the post was removed!
A humanist cannot place a supernatural species over its own species.
Therefore they shouldn't be religious.
@tulpas93 well I can't get behind myself. So clearly not all questions are worthy.
I don't like labels. I don't even usually call myself an atheist, although I will freely state that there are not now nor have there ever been any gods. So I'm not going to call myself a secular humanist.
Veganism is the more consistent extension of humanism to all sentient entities, and not weaponizing the same arbitrary prejudice pejorative against other species.
@@archangelarielle262 yawn
The man who brags about never having read a book in his life wants to be taken seriously. 😅😅😅😅😅😅😅
Secular humanism to me means whatever benefits me and my tribe the most
You seem confused
@InlaudatusPropheta Elaborate. Also, what is the meaning or significance of your handle 'InlaudatusPropheta'?
Secular humanism isn't tribalism. Harmony and cooperation with other people benefits you the most, no?
the term "cult" is artificially interjected w negative connotations because ppl don't understand that every alliance based on a prescribed theology w the intent to express to the world is a cult.
Similar to how negative connotations are artificially attributed to the word "judgement"... the function required for decision making which determines our survival.
There are layers upon layers of cults carefully interwoven into the fabric of society. Church and state have always been at the forefront of Cult Culture.
So much so, that Church and state are innocuously considered unassailable establishment... Because they are the most effective cults.
You are accepted only if you submit to their paradigms.
You are rejected if u deny their paradigms.
Any system or theology which opposes or circumvents the existing Cult of Church and State is given the "label" of CULT...
Which dehumanizes the opposing theology, giving guiltless permission to the CULT of Church and state to "righteously annihilate" the divergent theology.
"Citizens"(sla ves) are given numbers like bar codes, because we are a product to them... not a person.
Gigantic wall of text to say absolutely nothing worthwhile😮💨
@@albaniahenry-franklin2829 your inability to extract usable information out of my post reflects more of your limitations of understanding then limitations within my post.
I'll spoon feed it to you.
Society is saturated in CULTS....
There you go!!!! 😘
*"Society is saturated in CULT..."*
And you still said absolutely NOTHING worthwhile.
There you went🤣🤣
@albaniahenry-franklin2829
refer to my first reply. 😂
@albaniahenry-franklin2829 objective reality does not superimpose its objectivity on a subjective mind which objectively exists.
A mind objectively existing does not interfere w the fact that the minds perception & perspective is RELATIVE.
THERE IS OBJECTIVE REALITY.
HOWEVER, ONES PERCEPTION OF THAT OBJECTIVE REALITY IS SUBJECTIVE.
go on joe rogam and be useful then larper
That would be fantastic
Why is that useful? Who watches? him
Bla..bla go to the point
what are you trying to say?
From my perspective, I should not respect a humanist if he isn't willing to publicly acknowledge that every human being is a victim in the context that is existential. The human being is forced to exist and forced to suffer the consequences.
That’s called perspective brother, I choose to acknowledge I was brought into this world unwillingly, yet I can try to make my life the most beneficial to others based on humanistic values
@@spencertalan2563
If it can be said that any of us are respectable, it's not because we demonstrate an intellectual transparency in public. Certainly we _don't_ demonstrate that.
Okay.
At least I try to be substantive.
Secular humanism can be anything, even nazism 🤪
@eus38io no it can't.
@SansDeity yeah is the way Hitler presented it because it is based in humanist philosophy 🙄
No
2:12 "...that's just a theory a GAME theory"... Matt Pat mat dillahunty connections? Who knew? Jk
Well I’m not convinced
Thanks for supporting the channel even though you don't agree! ❤
@ it was supposed to be a jab against Matt’s “well I’m not convinced” he likes to say. Never realized he started growing a beard tho, maybe he’ll become an Orthodox priest!
"You are the world and the world is you." J. Krishnamurti
"That's just not true." -me.
Why do you fear TRUE stillness?
🤣🤣
@@mindlander
Our me's always say that.
@@albaniahenry-franklin2829
What do you mean by "stillness" ?
@@BobbyFriston
*"What do you mean by "stillness"?"*
Stillness is what exists between "you" and "mean" in your sentence.
Why is it that TRUE *stillness* frightens you so?
🤣🤣
Smart, but woke
Ah, that ridiculous label!
As soon as you try to name the ONE TRUE CREATOR, you just separated it from every other name within CREATION, invalidating it from being the ONE TRUE CREATOR.... 😂😂😂😂😂
Typical theistic codswallop😵💫
Why should we believe there is a one true creator to begin with?
@DiMadHatter u do u, Homie. I'm not telling u what to believe. I'm just telling u what I think. My theology is a working theory, not a dogmatic restriction.
@@Dark-Light_Ascendin
*"My theology is a working theory, not a dogmatic restriction."*
Also know as *bullshite*
🤣🤣🤣
@@albaniahenry-franklin2829 aren't u just contentious? 😂 atheists can be so hard to please. Isn't it nice to hear a theist say "my leanings are open to change?".... well... can't make everyone happy....
The one true CREATOR has no need of demands, (commandments) for he has the power of CREATION. Any limits he wished imposed are built into the fabric of CREATION, such as scientific natural Laws.
The CREATOR is definitely a man, though.
@Leith_Crowther every man is a CO-CREATOR within the GOD-HOOD. Our consciousness is an extension of the OMNI-CONSCIOUSNESS.
Pure, unadulterated, smelly bullshite🤣🤣
@@Dark-Light_Ascendin aka presuppositionalism.
@shawn223
I'm not like any theist you're used to.
*Allah will punish Matt for his disbelief and for leading people away from Islam. His heart troubles were the beginning of Allah's judges on him*
PURE COMEDY🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Resorting to empty threaths only shows how feeble your position is.
The existence of Muslims with heart problems immediately disproves your silly little threats.
Bet he is scared now 😂
"...Allah's judges on him" Who are "Allah's judges" - & are they, er, sitting on Matt?
All creation is built upon emptiness. Just ask the atom. Darkness created the light. Darkness is the scaffold on which Light is allowed expression. Darkness is the medium on which Light is painted.
Mycelium is the physical mechanism which connects all life. Light (physical) mycelium facilitates the continuum of physical creation. Light mycelium is a fractal extension of Dark mycelium, which facilitates the continuum of the eternal Dark Void.
Light does not move. DARKNESS carries the LIGHT. Light is not propelled forth from stars... Light is pulled on a escalater of Darkness by the eternal dark void. The "speed of light" is actually the "pressure of Darkness".
This measure is directly related to the dimension of a given universe. All of the infinite universes which comprise the OMNI-VERSE exist at the same time & place simultaneously. This is the ALL-SPARK WITHIN THE INFINITE DARK VOID. This is the CO-CREATOR WITHIN THE GOD-HOOD.
And even MORE nonsensical codswallop👀
@albaniahenry-franklin2829 😘
@albaniahenry-franklin2829 to be fair, those are personal theories of mine.... not Dogma. My theology is a working theory, not a strict belief system.
@@Dark-Light_Ascendin
*"My theology is a working theory, not a strict belief system."*
It's the same theistic poppycock with a different veneer😅
Don't ask the atom; they make up everything.
"our perception of the ONE TRUE CREATOR is a perfect CREATOR & created all things".... also Christians, "our perfect Creator of ALL THINGS only has 1 PERFECT CREATION.... within the NEAR INFINITE CREATIONS IN EXISTENCE..." 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 this would actually make Yahweh statistically the worst CREATOR in existence.
the fruit of a PERFECT CREATOR is PERFECT CREATIONS.
You say Yahweh CREATED FREE WILL & KNOWLEDGE... but then your dogma is taken to demonize FREE WILL & KNOWLEDGE... As if these are somehow themselves imperfect creations, or are the interface through which creations are made imperfect. (Through Sin)either way, it is the fruit of an imperfect CREATOR.
You say Yahweh created ALL THINGS... But then Yahweh claims to be vengeful & jealous... logically... to that which CREATED ALL THINGS, there is nothing to be vengeful or jealous of, FOR HE IS ALL THINGS.
Yahweh is a desert war god of hypocrisy, not the ONE TRUE CREATOR.
The actual ONE TRUE CREATOR is intrinsically connected to every quanta of CREATION. TO say there is a CREATION not connected to the actual ONE TRUE CREATOR is to proclaim the limits of your understanding, not the actual limits of CREATION.
UNITY is the inalienable quality of CREATION... not DIVISION & SEPERATION.... as is so insisted upon by the broken Theology of Abraham.
Your contrived Dogmas offer slavery & manipulation tactics which use mass Stockholm syndrome & mass psychosis to coerce CO-CREATORS into relinquishing their DIVINE SOVEREIGNTY unto SYSTEMS which insidiously abuse this Gift... such as church and state.
WE ARE ALL DIVINE SOVEREIGNTY.
I am the BRIGHTEST NIGHT.
I am the DARKEST LIGHT.... &
I am ASCENDING.
Garbage.
Your spamming is unconvincing.
Maybe this is the perfect 'Creator' (Lol) design, it's just going to take a trillion years to get there.
However you'd require evidence of a Creator, I wouldn't believe in your guess.
Bro got high watching Green Lantern and thought he was on to something. Take a nap, narcissist.
Matt... What do you think of Unitarian Universalism and Quakerism?
I like the UU churches.. Belief in the supernatural is not expected to be involved in the community. They support humanist principles and separation of church and state.
God is good and the devil is evil
You changed your profile name!
Does your Mom know you are on the internet again??
Thor and Loki? But they are both gods, no?
Now do Lord Voldermort.
So declares the admitted liar.
Nod is nood!
Rod is rood!
Shod is shood!