How to live a good and just life?
People who believe the answer to this question lies in human knowledge and critical awareness, who are compassionate and feel they should be solidary with the needs and rights of others are called humanists.
Everyone is responsible for their own life. Our actions should be based on thoughtful decisions, not on reckless acceptance of other people’s views, our own fears, and established habits. A critical re-examination of oneself and the society, authority, acquired knowledge, religious teachings, traditions, the use of one’s own reason, civil courage, willingness to take responsibility for one’s own words and deeds – will give benefit to us and our children to live a life without fear and deception, to live a responsibly and fulfilled life worth living.
The term “evolutionary humanism” promoted by our association denotes a postnational, secular, and critical-rational (i.e., both anti-dogmatic and anti-relativistic) worldview introduced by Julian Huxley, based on scientific, philosophical, and artistic sources.
(S)he who has science, philosophy, and art does not need religion!
Evolutionary humanists do not convey a bitter message, but a completely cheerful one, which completely overshadows the alternative efforts of ‘religious competitors’. The reasons for this are obvious: First, the ‘good news of evolutionary humanism’ brings such a meaning /of life/ that is truly experienced through the senses, and one does not have to dream beyond them. Secondly, it is in line with the best cognitive system that humanity has developed in its history: with science. The result is that “the Enlightenment project of removing illusions about the world gives the world a new, ‘rational charm.’
Humanist thought is incomplete without feminist thought – only in their interconnectedness, they offer a complete picture of a society that most easily bases its patriarchy on religious postulates. Ease is not reflected in the strength and prudence of arguments, but in a kind of aura of the dogmatism of the religious understanding of patriarchal power structures.
We believe that feminists must not give in to the challenge of critically rethinking the religious conception of female identity. In the critique of such worldviews and in the consideration of alternatives, it is precisely clear and unambiguous feminist thought that offers the most concise answers.
But feminist theory is not only important in religious discourse. There is also a huge need to break down the prejudices that prevail towards the feminist movement in an active irreligious community. We are surprised by the pronounced anti-feminist attitude that emerges every now and then on social networks among active (foreign and domestic) irreligious people. The degree of ignorance of feminist history, logical errors, and erroneous conclusions drawn on the basis of anti-feminist and often sexist attitudes do not surprise us, as much as the astonishing and ignorant stubbornness with which these attitudes try to rationally justify themselves.