Why Atheism and Secular Humanism are Failed Philosophies

[TheDarkestOfAngels]

Why Atheism and Secular Humanism are Failed Philosophies

Let me start out by saying I used to be an atheist and in a way sort of am.
Secular humanism (which now will be abbreviated as SH and is synonymous for atheism or agnosticism) is an absolute cancer, a poison to society. I could give you the arguments of communism, Hitler, etc, but I used to read these forums and realize these are old tired points, so here’s something fresh.

Your little theory has already failed. Atheism isn't a philosophy - it's a rejection of theistic claims - a denial of the supernatural and of god as being 'a thing.'
You certainly could give argueemtsn on communism (an economic system that has nothing to do with religion), Hitler (a Catholic), and other such things, but those arugements have long since failed to mean anything or gain traction here or anywhere because they are based on fiction and not fact.
Such that it is, avoiding those topics is an excellent idea.

SH does have a God. That God is I. The God of SH is me and all that matters (the alpha to the omega) is my personal happiness. This philosophy is deeply flawed. And the ultimate referendum is coming very shortly.

Atheists tend to be of the sort that don't get up every sunday (or saturday) of every week to get overdressed to apoligize for being human and submit ourselves into slavery and give 10% of our income to a group of people so they can tell us how to behave and who we can and cannot have sex with. Atheists do tend to be people who think rationally and approach the universe with questions rather than answers we made up and pretend to be the truth.
Yet, you say that we have the flawed ideaology? We dont' even have a common ideaology. Have you seen us argue with one antoher about politics? Our only commonality is our mutual rejection of your religious stupidity and fundementalism.

I am entirely convinced (as is Stephen Hawking and many others) that in the very near future – we’re talking a decade – humanity itself will start to unravel. In order to enhance our happiness and well being, we’re going to begin putting machines in our bodies. At first it will be a chip in our brain to augment our intelligence, then we’ll replace our organs, perhaps even lack a corporal form and so on and so forth until we can no longer be considered human. If this doesn’t happen, within the next 30 – 40 years we’ll have full immersion virtual reality, where we can live in fantasy lands of unending pleasure. We can be Jake Sully in Avatar, have sex that feels real, go to the moon, the stars – who would ever want to live in this pathetic world? Eventually we’ll be so dependent; we’ll forgo our bodies and place our brains in boxes so we can live in our virtual ‘reality’ unmolested. And why will all of you do this? Because again, happiness is what it’s all about – there ain’t nothing higher.

We've already started doing that - see pacemakers and artificial limbs for an easy way to see this. There are already cyborgs among us and they've been fairly common for over a decade now.
You are right for stating that humans and machines will, over time, be less and less distinguishable from one another - for better or worse. Human beings and our bodies are quite fragile and imperfect and frankly, we can do better.
By the tiem this happens, our intelligence and technological and physical ability will surpass anythign we could imagine today. You call this pathetic, but if you say that, I call that criticism lacking in imagination. Those "boxes" or computers of the future can be so powerful that even one is trillions of times as intelligent as every human that ever lived combined - not to mention what we'll be technically capable of outside of computer wizardry.

You can call me crazy, which I’m sure a lot of you will. But they said the same thing of Einstein, and Darwin, the examples go on.

There's a difference between their crazy and that of a religious zealot. One is crazy because their theories challenge accepted norms and they're place in history is there because they were proven correct and they're not even the zaniest of people who have positively affected our technological and scientific progress.

Your kind of crazy is the delusional kind. Don't compare yourself to the greatest minds of human history. You make yourself look like an idiot.

If you’ve read the literature and understand what our fate will be – chew on this: since my little scenario will mean the destruction of humanity (the ultimate evil) was the medieval Church right for hating science?

Your scenario is flawed and therefore your conclusion is irrelevant.

Why won’t I become a machine? Why won’t I let the Matrix come true? Because through my finding of religion (Judaism in case you’re wondering) I realized there’s something higher in this world than me.

I enjoy being human as much as the next one - but your disdain for Hawking's (and realy a fairly common) prediction of humanity's future is heavily flawed and based on terrible assumptions.
You go on apoligizing for being human. I'll make do with what I am and I'll continue to be proud of the kind of person I've become and all the flaws and imperfections that entails. Given the opportunity to merge with a machine and become a godlike intelligence and technological power, I think I would take it. After that, I can essentially go back and forth as often as I like.