It is a natural human desire to feel we are a part of something greater than ourselves. Humanists believe this desire is responsible for all irrational, supernatural, and prejudicial beliefs in the world today. It is only by the overcoming of this desire that we can live up to our potential as human beings. This denial of a basic human trait is the fatal flaw in Humanism.
To be a part of something greater than ourselves is to give ourselves the illusion of immortality, to overcome the fear of death, to find for ourselves associates that think like ourselves, and to adapt a moral code by which we can live and be happy. Read my essay on immortality for more insight.
For the Humanist, being part of something greater than ourselves is to deny reality, and accepting beliefs in the supernatural and metaphysical. It is to be religious, or worse yet, superstitious. It is a life of blissful ignorance and nothing more.
I should note for the record, that Humanism is not completely worthless. In fact, of all the BS philosophies mentioned here, Humanism is the most rational of the bunch. I would recommend reading the Humanist Manifesto for an outline of their philosophy, chances are you will not believe it all, but some of it will be worth while.
Humanism is about becoming, rather than believing. It is about understanding who we are individually and as a species, and about understanding our place in the universe. In my opinion, none of this is bad. As Socrates said, the greatest knowledge we can gain is to know ourselves. The problem is, and many people who believe they have found themselves will agree, it is not enough. To understand yourself is like a puzzle piece seeing its own shape and texture, but not being able to see the whole puzzle, does not know where to go. Once you understand yourself, the next desire is to find a place where you fit in.
In an attempt to circumvent these desires of fitting in, Humanism has become itself a pseudo-religion with the same "holier than thou" attitude they despise in traditional faiths. Anyone believing in God or heaven is just as irrational as someone who believes in the tooth fairy. To quote the Manifesto:
In the best sense, religion may inspire dedication to the highest ethical ideals. The cultivation of moral devotion and creative imagination is an expression of genuine "spiritual" experience and aspiration.
We believe, however, that traditional dogmatic or authoritarian religions that place revelation, God, ritual, or creed above human needs and experience do a disservice to the human species. Any account of nature should pass the tests of scientific evidence; in our judgment, the dogmas and myths of traditional religions do not do so. Even at this late date in human history, certain elementary facts based upon the critical use of scientific reason have to be restated. We find insufficient evidence for belief in the existence of a supernatural; it is either meaningless or irrelevant to the question of survival and fulfillment of the human race. As nontheists, we begin with humans not God, nature not deity. Nature may indeed be broader and deeper than we now know; any new discoveries, however, will but enlarge our knowledge of the natural.
I do not know of any religion in the world that fits the description of the first paragraph, that does not also meets any of the objections cited in the second paragraph. Instead of telling you where your puzzle piece goes, they simply tell you where it does not go, leaving you just as lost. The contradiction is in the italicized part above: How is it possible to place revelation, God, ritual, or creed above human needs, when revelation, God, ritual, or creed are in fact human needs?
On this issue, I am in agreement with William James: If a basic human desire is being met through belief in unverifiable ideas, and if these ideas are themselves not harmful, then why should we object to them? These unverifiable beliefs are called metaphysical, and they are not the same thing as irrational. In short, I believe in the need for religious toleration, if for no other reason than that religious people can tell us something about human nature.
Let me restate: It is a natural human desire to feel we are a part of something greater than ourselves. Instead of denying the desire part, it would be in the best interest of Humanists to establish a "something greater" that does not include irrational beliefs they despise so much, and at the same time does more than just reject all the other "something greaters" out there.
I believe it is possible to establish a "something greater" without accepting irrational or provably false ideas. But, there is always going to be a metaphysical aspect, otherwise it will not have any power with humanity. The metaphysical does not necessarily have to be God or heaven, but merely a faith in meaning where no meaning may really exist.
Maybe life is about learning all we can, and teaching the next generation what we know, in an effort to guide humanity toward some next level of evolution. The paragraphs above talk about the fulfillment of the human race. We have no idea where humanity is going, or whether it should be going there at all. This fulfillment is metaphysical in nature, or "superstitious" by some definitions. You see, the metaphysical is a part of all belief systems, even the skeptical non-believers calling themselves "Humanists".
You can visit the American Humanist Association for more on Humanism.
Next: Assorted BS Barely Worth Mentioning