Secular humanism is and has been on the way out and as a philosophy it's sort of impoverished. The big issue is in the title, namely the simplistic relationship

Secular humanism is and has been on the way out and as a philosophy it's sort of impoverished. The big issue is in the title, namely the simplistic relationship to truth. There's a dinstinction between fact, which is the business of science, and truth which is always contextual. Take the claim from the article: "Truths about the universe don’t depend on which country you are in" Facts about the universe don't care where you're at. Truth which imposes meaning and perspective on facts very much does. By neglecting culture, myth and narrative which are central to how humans make sense of the world this secular perspective becomes completely unappealing, and that's not the fault of the non-enlightened masses but because that worldview is superficial. It also has the tendency to end up with a scientific fatalism that conflates what is and what ought to be. This is usually where secular humanism suddenly turns a little bit dark, and not-so-very-humanist. Also on display in the article when "behavioral genetics" is elevated from something that ought to provide us with tools to increase human agency to something that apparently "determines life outcomes" ("genetic lottery"). That's the point where it's obvious that really the belief system is something closer to scientism, that is to say using science to impose values on people. A belief system that ignored human cultural and religious experience and reduces individuals to a collection of genes is many things, but certainly not humanistic.