The previous sections have demonstrated only a few of Atheism and Secular Humanism’s pervasive problems. What is unique about Secular Humanism is not provable. The claims of an infinitely old universe are unsupportable. The demand that science is the only source of reliable knowledge is self-defeating. The lack of explanation for objective morality and absolute value point to the fact that Secular Humanism is unable to stand.
The most glaring problem, however, is that none of these ideas offers any advantage philosophically. They do not explain cosmology any more adequately than alternative ideas. They do not present any predictive power in scientific terms, which is the benchmark for a valid theory. There is no good reason to accept Secular Humanism over any other worldview, and there seems ample reason to look elsewhere if rationality is desired.
Why then, are these unsupported, unproductive ideas adhered to by secular humanists? Is it possible that there is an ulterior motive for making these claims? Is it possible that there is some subtle agenda at play, which sways these otherwise bright minds toward unimaginable absurdity? Is it possible that there is something to gain by believing these ideas? Aldous Huxley, an author, and philosopher, nominated for seven Nobel prizes in literature, thought so. Huxley’s honesty and clarity on the subject seem all too plausible.
"I had motives for not wanting the world to have meaning; consequently, assumed it had none and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption.... The philosopher who finds no meaning in the world is not concerned exclusively with a problem in pure metaphysics; he is also concerned to prove there is no valid reason why he personally should not do as he wants to do... For myself, as no doubt for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was simultaneously liberation from a certain political and economic system and liberation from a certain system of morality. We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom."1
Whether Aldous Huxley is right or not, I do not know. I can’t see into the minds of those who have decided to be atheist or Secular Humanist. All I know is that there seems to be a very broken worldview that millions ascribe to. Their adherence does not make them any less capable in their ability to live a moral and successful life. Owing to the fact that life seems to be ‘working,’ most atheists and Secular Humanists are pleased enough with the results to continue on. It should be said, that just because a worldview ‘works’ doesn’t mean it is right.
Let’s say that my house is a mess and I really should clean it. However, I lack the motivation to do so. Now imagine that I get a prank call from a friend, who does an impressive impersonation of the president. He convinces me that the president is going to come visit me at my house tomorrow. Under this false belief, I would begin to clean my house. I would even dust the fan blades and mop the kitchen floor, things I normally wouldn’t do.
It could be said that the false assumption that the president is coming for tea, ‘worked.’ It worked well enough to get me to clean my house. However, just because the assumption ‘worked’ doesn’t make it true.
In the same way, just because atheism is ‘working’ on a purely pragmatic level, doesn’t mean that it’s the most accurate view of the universe. If naturalistic pragmatism is all that one requires, then they might be happy enough to continue on with an atheistic worldview like Secular Humanism. However, for those who seek truth, and not just something that ‘works’ my suggestion will be clear in the pages that follow.
1 Huxley, Aldous. “Confessions of a Professed Atheist” Report: Perspective on the News, Vol. 3, (1966): 19