Acevedo 1

Tatiana Acevedo
Mr.Pichette
Philosophy/ Humanist Manifesto
December 8, 2015
Humanist Manifesto

1. The Humanists believe that religion has lost its purpose within doctrines and methods to
help solve problems. Believing that religion is fatal and a great danger to use as a solution
during the twentieth century. Christians believe that the bible has the answers. When
crying for help or lost in their walk with God, they can refer to the bible. The bible is
something that God blessed Christians with as a guide. The messages that are written in
the bible are supposed to help answer questions that Christians have, or be a comfort
when pain is inflicted upon them. Christian religion is something that can bring people
together in harmony without destruction.
2. Second proposition that is in opposition to the beliefs of Christianity located in (HM1,
affir. 1), is the belief that the universe had already existed and was not created. Christians
believe in creation which was a passage written in the book of Genesis within the bible.
In the bible it states that God had spent seven days creating the universe. Philosophically,
how could the universe already exist? The human race and large population of animal
species could not have evolved out of thin air neither the universe. If the universe had
already existed, how come it took so long for the human race to appear, and why didnt
we already exist? Everything that has been invented, were all creations. Food is created
by trees and plants, clothes are created by materials created by animals or plants. Before
things existed, they had to be created somehow and not already exist.

Acevedo 2

3. Third opposition that the humanists believe located in: (HM1, affir. 6), is that they are
convinced that it is too late for new thought of theism, deism, and etc. Humanists did
not base their actions on ethical conduct, but of what they wanted. Christians have a
source that helps when they cant decide what is right or wrong. The Bible is their guide
to salvation along with God. Humanists have no God in their lives, for they believe that
too much time has passed to believe in one. Humanists believing that there is reason to
have to believe in one to make sense of the world. For the only explanation of their
existence, was based on science.
4. Religious humanists believe that once a person realizes their true personality, that it
would be the end of their life. Finding who they really are is what matters as it states:
This is the explanation of the humanist social passion (HM1 affir, 8). For Christians,
discovering and knowing Christ is whats important. Once finding Christ their jobs is to
continue their lives serving, sacrificing, and following the commandments that God had
written. For someone to find Christ they need a believer to evangelize to them and open
their eyes to the truth of Jesus. Once Christians find out who they are it is not the end of
their lives, but only the beginning.
5. Worship and prayer to the humanists are meant to help with their social well-being, and
personal life. It states that the humanists used this to: find his religious emotions (HM1
affir. 9). Christians use prayer and worship as a tool to help others. For Christians prayer
isnt used to pray for riches, success, or any other selfish needs, but for others. Prayer is a
call for Gods help. God doesnt answer all the time, but when he does he performs
miracles. Humanists use prayer as if God is their servant who grants their wishes, when it
is supposed to be opposite. Christians know that they are the servant to God whom is
their father.

Acevedo 3

6. The sixth proposition states: religious humanists aim to foster the creative in man and to
encourage achievements that add to the satisfactions of life (HM1 affir. 12). In
Christianity the huge achievements mean so little depending on what they are. In life it
isnt about the reputation or how successful someone is in their career. Christian
achievements that matter to God are selfless and shouldnt benefit the person themselves,
but others around them. If the achievement is for the satisfaction of the person, it doesnt
or shouldnt mean much. Humanists take the achievements and become prideful. The
award or title that they receive is something that will make them feel more supreme than
7.

others, separating them more and more away from God.

Religious humanists wont believe as it states: promises of immortal salvation or fear of
eternal damnation are both illusory and harmful (HM2, affir. 2). For Christians is it
quite the opposite. Christianity uses this promise as a motivator and encouragement to
achieve immortal salvation. The ultimate goal is to be able to enter the gates of heaven
with the Lord. A humanist seeing this promise as harmful and illusory doesnt make
sense, for having a goal cannot be harmful. The fear of damnation is a source to help

Christians from taking the wrong path.

8. Faith is a very important part of the Christian religion, for it is the foundation of their
lives. Humanists believe differently: Reason and intelligence are the most effective
instruments that humankind possesses. There is no substitute (HM2, affir. 4). Reason
and intelligence are both great qualities to posses in life, but cannot help all the time.
When someone is suffering in a hard time, faith can help support and overcome almost
anything. When sick from a very severe illness, neither reason nor intelligence is going to
help, but faith. Faith can bring miracles and alter someones life, to bring them peace into
their souls and grant them a more content life.

Acevedo 4

9. The ninth proposition of the religious humanists states: The right to birth control,
abortion, and divorce should be recognized (HM2, affir. 6). Christianity has a very strict
and strong regulation against these three things. In the bible it clearly states the answer to
these three topics, stating that Christians need to stay sexually pure until marriage. The
marriage commitment is also very important, for it is a promise that should not be
broken. To the religious humanists there is no harm to be sexually impure. That there is
no harm when an unborn child is killed for it wouldnt know any better. That divorcing
someone and breaking that promise is fine, because there is always someone else that
they could marry.
10. The last proposition states: Humans are responsible for what we are and will become.
No deity will save us; we must save ourselves (HM2, affir. 1). This final proposition of
many is the most important. Christians always know that they are never alone. When in
trouble, they can always reach out their hand towards God and he will guide them back to
the right path. We humans are the children of God. As a father, God would never abandon
his children, no matter what they believe or who they are. Humanists believe that they are
by themselves. That when in trouble they have to figure it out alone with no support to
help guide them. All one needs to do is open his eyes and just listen, for there is a God
waiting for them to hear him.

1. The first logical flaw found in the Humanist Manifesto is located in (HM2, para. 1). A
non- sequitur is shown within the passage based on the conclusion that differs from the
premises. A non-sequitur is stating something that does not logically follow the premises

Acevedo 5

that are given. Located within the paragraph, the writer begins with talking about how
Nazism shows the capability of brutality in humanity. As the paragraph continues, it talks
about the good and evil that science has brought within humanity explaining how it
begins issues. The paragraph flows until the conclusion, which concludes with In
various societies, the demands of women and minority groups for equal rights effectively
challenge our generation (HM2, para. 1). The last sentence demonstrates that it does not
flow with the rest of the argument.
2. Second fallacy shown within the Manifesto is a statement that appears to have very little
proof. The statement is making a universal claim, even though the evidence to support it
is very limited. Hasty generalization is drawing to a universal conclusion that is based on
little facts or information stated. Written in the Manifesto states: Salvationism, based on
mere affirmation, still appears as harmful, diverting people with false hopes of heaven
hereafter (HM2, para. 2). This statement shows hasty generalization, by the way it starts
out stating the small amount of information they had but, continuing to draw the
conclusion.
3. Generalization, is assuming a general statement to be true with no evidence at all. A
perfect example of generalization is this: Using technology wisely, we can control our
environment, conquer poverty, markedly reduce disease, extend our life-span, vast new
powers, and provide humankind with unparallel opportunity for achieving an abundant
and meaningful life (HM2, para. 4). The author is concluding that with the power of
technology we can secure many things. Nowhere in the statement does it say anything
about evidence of it positively being true. Scientific facts or the probability if it actually
being true would have helped to ensure the reader of its authenticity.
4. The fourth contradiction found is one that is very bias. In the passage it states: Although
we believe in cultural diversity and encourage racial and ethnic pride, we reject

Acevedo 6

separations which promote alienation and set people and groups against each other
(HM2, para. 20). The writer of this Manifesto is saying something that he is for, but also
saying he is against it, not being able to make up their mind. This fallacy can confuse the
reader not being able to quite understand what the author is insisting.
5. A slippery Slope, is arguing that one thing will lead to another. The Manifesto states: By
this positive morale and intention humanism will be guided, and from this perspective
and alignment the techniques and efforts of humanism will flow (HM1, affir. 15). This
quote clearly shows that if one thing is done, it will lead to something else. The author is
also assuring to the readers that the morale will guide humanism and help it flow without
any proof or evidence for support.
6. The sixth logical fallacy found jumps to conclusions. Jumping to conclusions is drawing
conclusions without any facts present. Without facts, the reader isnt going to be sure if
what the author says is real or not without the evidence. Stated within the paragraph the
author writes: The separation of the church and state and the separation of ideology and
state are imperatives (HM2, affir. 9). The definition of imperative means crucial or
urgent. The reader has no idea why the separation was so crucial and urgent because of
the lack of information.
7. An argument that is supposed to defend a conclusion proves a different conclusion
instead is called an irrelevant conclusion. Located in the second part of the Manifesto
(HM2, affir. 16), a paragraph talks about problems with economic enlargement as well as
safeguards for human rights. The author is supposed to try to prove to the reader that
economic growth and increase can no longer be determined by one nation
unaccompanied. The writer concludes the small paragraph talking about birth control
techniques to portions of the globe as well as world poverty. The conclusion of the

Acevedo 7

argument was very irrelevant and had proved something completely different then what
was said in the beginning.
8. The eighth fallacy is written in a way that makes the reader feel as if they already know
what the author is trying to depict without any proof. The author uses a word in their
passage that makes the reader assume its true: Obviously humanism does not deny the
possibility of realties (HM1, affir. 5). The word Obviously, used in the passage is
hiding the fact that there is no evidence for what is stated. Assumption can be false and
mislead the reader from thinking that the humanists deny possibility of realities. Evidence
is what helps support and understand the full truth and to not just assume.
9. Generalization is found once again within the Manifesto. Generalization is to declare a
universal statement to be true, without any proof or evidence to support it. Written in the
first part of the Manifesto, it states: Though we consider the religious forms and ideas of
our father no longer adequate, the quest for the good life is still the central task for
mankind (HM1, para. 16). The first part of the quote is where the fallacy lies. Assuming
that everyone believes that the forms and ideas are no longer sufficient is false. Without
any scientific proof that the universal population believes it is true, there is no way of
being certain.
10. The tenth and final logical fallacy found is called an appeal to tradition. Assuming that
something is true based on it being older, or traditional. It is arguing in (HM1, affir. 4),
that based on anthropology and the past, a person is molded by its surroundings.
Everyone has a different personality and isnt always easily influenced by others around
them. Claiming the argument to be a fact is false, for history can change and people are
different. If the author would have shown proven facts and scientific proof of the claim,
then the argument could have been legitimate.

Acevedo 8

1. How can you be so sure of something and state an argument as true, without any evidence
to support it? The reason for the question is, because many accusations within the
Manifesto assures of its authenticity without verification or conformation from a source.
2. Humanists claimed already that they are convinced that avid and profit-motivated society
has already shown itself to be inadequate, but how are you convinced? Within the small
paragraph stating the claim, it shows no reason or examples of why they were convinced.
After the statement was said, it jumps to the conclusion of what the goal of humanism
should be, dodging the explanation of why.
3. Why do you believe the world self-existed and was not created? Almost everything in the
world started out as a design, seed, idea, or dream later to become creations. The universe
could not have been existent without any creator. Again, if the universe had already
existed, how come it took so long for the human race to appear? Why didnt we exist

Acevedo 9

before? If you already believe that the world was self existent, you should be able to
explain why.
4. If the religious doctrines have lost significance and power to help solve problems in our
lives, then how can you explain the guidance one finds when he/she reads the bible? A
Christians most important doctrine is the bible. The bible is the word of God and referred
to as a guide when problems occur and things go wrong. Reading it, many people have
found answers to their troubles.
5. In many situations, faith is needed. For example if you were diagnosed with a disease or
cancer that was incurable, how is reason and intelligence going to keep you alive? The
question I ask is; if faith isnt a top tool, then how can you trust? If faith isnt a key to
humankind, then your own intelligence cant be trusted for you have to have faith in it.
Reason cant get you out of a situation unless you have faith it is going to work. Without
faith reason and intelligence wouldnt work. It is like making plans for the future, but not
taking action to actually do it.

Acevedo 10

1. The first significant weakness within the Humanist Manifesto is the lack of information.
Conclusions are being jumped to and accusations are being stated, without any support.
The authors of the Manifestos state their ideas and opinions about what needs to be
changed in the world, but sometimes dont answer why it needs to be changed.
Generalization is one of the most common fallacies that correspond with this weakness,
because of the missing information. Generalization can be found in (HM2, para. 4),
where it talks about how technology is the resource that will help to have a better life.
2. The second weakness in the Manifesto is when information is given and premises are
listed, but doesnt match or support the conclusion. A non-sequitur is exactly that. There
were many non-sequiturs found within the Manifesto that did add up their conclusions. If
trying to persuade or change someones idea of something in an argument, then the
premises have to support the conclusion. An example of a non-sequitur found is located
in (HM2, para. 1). It starts out talking about Nazism and how humanity is very capable of
it. The premises after flow with the beginning, but the conclusion talks about women and
the minority groups that want equal rights. The argument flowed until the conclusion
where it became irrelevant.

Acevedo 11

3. The third and final weakness of many within the Humanist Manifesto is the attacking of
other beliefs rather than dealing with another argument. The fallacy known for attacking
other beliefs is known as an ad hominem. Within the Manifesto, the writers had many
instances where Christianity was being targeted. Statements such as God is dead (HM2
affir. 2), or how immortal salvation can be harmful. Attacking other beliefs doesnt help
assure their own.

Overall in my opinion I believe these authors to be very desperate for attention towards their
own beliefs. Within the Manifestos, many logical fallacies were found to help support my
opinion. The most common of the fallacies were ad hominems that attacked other beliefs,
making them seem worthless and a waste of time to look into. The writers had times where they
were trying to argue to prove something, but turned around and discriminated Christianity or
other religions. In my opinion the writers could have also done a better job at supporting their
conclusions and ideas with evidence. Jumping to the conclusion that something will work or
change the world in some way needs to be supported with a plan and not the results. If the
proposition was organized with facts about the problems and the authenticity that the idea they
have will work would draw in the reader. Seeing that the results are only listed, tells the reader
that the person is unprepared and not entirely sure if their idea would actually work. Nonsequiturs also made me think that the authors were dodging arguments by answering them
wrong. To come to a good conclusion a person needs a solid foundation and premises that flow.
When the foundation is set and the premises flow, but the conclusion doesnt match the reader
gets an idea that the author is avoiding the answer. The irrelevant conclusion of a non-sequitur is
another very good example that the author seems desperate. Wanting people to believe and go

Acevedo 12

along with their ideas, even though it doesnt make sense is a way the author is showing that they
would do or say anything for attention, in my opinion. Also I believe that the authors had wasted
their time writing this Manifesto, for it really does not serve any purpose at all in persuading
anyone. In my opinion someone should start the Humanist Manifesto all over again, making sure
that it makes sense and has scientific evidence or some type of proof for support.