How do we refute secular humanism?

Podcast

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
a Mayavadi understanding. Thank you. How do we share Krishna Bhakti with people who are secular humanists, who focus on the idea that there is nothing beyond matter? Yes.
Thank you. This is a paradox of the materialistic view of life, that at one level, people think that to be materialistic is to be free, to enjoy all of life’s pleasures the way we want them to, the way we want, there is no religion, no restriction, do whatever you want. But actually, the materialistic worldview is the most restrictive worldview, philosophical, because materialism, literal materialism, if it is taken to its logical conclusion, it means we have no free will.
In fact, there is no we at all. Because the idea of there is a conscious being, there is consciousness itself is an illusion. So, Einstein himself was very ambiguous about the consequences of the materialistic worldview.
He said that if reductive materialism were true, then that would mean the Nazis who killed millions of Jews, they can’t be blamed, because that’s the way their biology programmed them. So, if there is no free will at all, then all systems of justice, all systems of accountability, everything collapses. So, materialism is itself logically inconsistent.
Because to believe materialism, to accept materialism, to propagate materialism, there has to be a conscious observer, a conscious perceiver who propagates materialism. But within materialism, there is Arthur Schopenhauer, he said, materialism is the philosophy of the philosopher who has forgotten himself. Means the philosophy leaves out oneself out of the philosophy.
So, one simple way to challenge materialism would be to just argue this that, okay, do you accept that you exist? Obviously, very few people say I don’t exist. Say, yeah, I exist. Well, then who is this I that exists? Oh, it’s just some function of the brain.
Okay, you say it’s a function of the brain, but who is saying that it is a function of the brain? It is a function of the brain, but who is it that is saying that it is a function of the brain? If you just go backward, backward, backward, every question that we ask, it’s an illusion, consciousness is an illusion. Okay, it’s an illusion, but who is perceiving that illusion? If somebody says, oh, that is not water, that is a mirage, it’s an illusion. Fine, it’s an illusion, but who is perceiving that illusion? Illusion needs some person who goes into illusion.
So, the idea of a conscious observer is vital for any philosophy. And materialism will lead to logical incoherence, because materialism does not allow any room for emotions. It does not allow any room for consciousness.
It does not allow any room for free will. And it makes all of existence basically meaningless. It makes all of us into automatons who are simply programmed beings.
And even materialists don’t truly live the materialistic ideology. Nobody can live that ideology. Even if, say, a hard core materialist, they are arguing materialism alone is true.
Why are they arguing like that? Well, if I am programmed to be a spiritualist and you are programmed to be a materialist, that’s why are you arguing at all? Isn’t it? So, materialistic people write books about how materialism is true. But the purpose of writing this book is to make other people into materialists. And if somebody can change from being a spiritualist to be a materialist, that means they have free will.
And if they have free will, that means materialism is not true. So, if materialism is true, if somebody accepts materialism to be true, then materialism is not true. It’s materialism is inherently a self-contradictory doctrine.
It’s a statement like somebody says, I don’t know a single word of English. You already spoke 8 words. So, materialism is not at all logically coherent.