Her first point struck a chord with me, because I often expect the worst when discussing my religious beliefs (or lack thereof) with people I like and know to be religious:
1) Don’t expect a negative reaction. Most people have a positive initial reaction to the word “humanism” or “humanist.” They likely want to hear what you’re going to say, and chances are they’re going to agree with a fair amount, except the rejection of the supernatural. So don’t ruin someone’s initially good impression of the word humanism by assuming he or she is going to react negatively to the philosophy; a positive response allows you to lead with a positive introduction. Of course, there’s also a chance that the person you’re talking to is a humanist and just doesn’t know it.I've found that I will often scrimp on the details while explaining humanism, partially because I'm more concerned with not offending anyone that I like and/or respect than I am with being true to myself and my beliefs. I know from experience that many people will mentally and emotionally shut off at the very idea of being godless, as if simply learning about someone else's belief system might be considered blasphemy on their part. This reaction does not seem to extend to learning about other world regions.
Hancock is exactly right when she says that most of the people that I interact with agree with the humanist approach to living a good life and being a good person. However, the "nothing is supernatural" component of humanism tends to be a non-starter for most people. This leads me to the other reason I that I shy away the details of my humanist beliefs: I'm never quite sure which aspect I should be focusing on. If I begin my referencing atheism, as I often do, it immediately puts me on the defensive and I start backpedaling and belittling my own beliefs. I've only recently become aware that I am even doing this, and it is not something I am proud of. Instead, Hancock suggests two points:
4) Don’t talk about God. Most people, including most religious people, have very little interest in talking about the existence of God. And in our scenario, you haven’t been asked about that topic. You were asked about humanism. What’s interesting is that you wouldn’t even have to make a rejection of the supernatural explicit—people understand immediately that a deity is missing when you don’t invoke God or religion as the basis for your morality.and
7) Don’t forget to talk about morality. The most attractive thing about humanism is its strong moral foundation. And yet most of us feel an urge to talk to strangers about the existence or non-existence of God. Don’t make this mistake. Talk about morality for the sake of morality without even going into the fact that yours isn’t grounded in a God belief. The truth is, most people consider morality a highly important topic, and the most exciting part about discussing moral issues with people is that if it turns out they are also irreligious, they will at this point get really excited and want to become your friend. It happens to me all the time!This is great advice! I am not discussing atheism - I am talking about the much larger topic of humanism. Humanism is the framework in which I think about morality. Moral actions and beliefs should be determined by careful consideration, open debate, and should be based on the best information available and updated accordingly. I don't need to add the "...and not handed down from on high" rejoinder; people implicitly understand what I am talking about. This is the strength of humanism, and therefore it should probably be the first thing I talk about when I'm introducing someone to its tenets.
You can check out Hancock's other three points here -they are definitely worth the read! I found her most interesting idea to be that you may be talking to a fellow humanist that just doesn't know it yet-- what a novel idea!
Glad you liked it! Have a great New Year's Eve.
ReplyDelete