If What's Testable Is Not Unique, Is What's Unique Testable?

Let’s imagine that you go to the doctor’s office to get a blood test. You’re concerned that you may have a blood disease. The doctor is running behind because he has ten blood tests he needs to run before the end of the day. So, instead of take the time to do them all individually, he just uncaps the test tubes where all the blood samples are stored and mixes the blood. He runs one test on the mixture, instead of ten. He figures if the test comes back negative, then everyone’s blood who he mixed is negative. However, when he gets the results, it is positive. One or more of the ten people, has the disease. It might be you. Since there is no way to know, he will have to get a new sample from each person and run the ten tests.
You should know that secular humanism is a blood mixture, so to speak. It has taken things from a range of different ideologies. If we want to run an ideology test on secular humanism then we need to do a little dividing. We need a unique blood sample that is only from secular humanism. Dividing ideas is much easier than dividing blood cells.
The above list of eight unique statements is pulled directly from secular humanist literature. These are the types of ideas that are present when all of the borrowed material is removed from the secular humanist worldview. The list is not exhaustive, by any means, but it does represent a troubling and revealing problem present in the ideology. All of these statements, by current scientific or evidentiary methods, are not objectively testable. Their subjective nature makes them impossible to verify. The secular humanist claims that observation, experimentation and rational analysis are the best ways that humankind gains knowledge. However, none of these statements could have been derived by that method, even though they are central to the philosophy. Instead, these statements are presuppositions without evidentiary support. They are, at their base level, secular humanist dogma which one must believe apart from proof. Not only are most of these statements not objectively testable, but they are without compelling philosophical advantage. There is no well-established reason why these dangling ideas are any better than the ones they wish to usurp. These presuppositions are presented without concrete evidence in the Humanist Manifestos and should be seen as such. 
Although there is no concrete proof submitted for these statements, there is evidence that suggests some, if not all, of these eight ideas, are wrong. Observation alone offers a limited epistemology, and this is where Secular Humanism begins to limp. The Humanist Manifesto III says that nature is “self-existing.”⁠1 In the same manifesto, it is also stated that “knowledge of the world is derived by observation, experimentation, and rational analysis.”⁠2 These two statements are logically contradictory, and present a problem for this ailing worldview.

1 Humanist Manifesto III

2 Ibid.

Comments