North Carolina Society for Ethical Culture

Are You A Humanist?
By Tony Hileman, Executive Director, American Humanist Association
A platform talk given on October 8, 2000

I’m here to speak to you about Humanism, and contrast it to Ethical Culture in likeness and difference, and to help you decide if you’re a Humanist.

Recent times have seen a relentless shift from creeds of authority to ethics of responsibility. The institutions we’ve chosen to provide us community no longer offer pat answers to life’s larger questions; meaning and values no longer come pre-packaged. We’re left to discover these things on our own. They are our own personal responsibility … but there are schools of thought that help. Humanism, ethical Humanism, is one.

What we do matters. And the philosophy, the worldview we develop and rely on to guide us in our actions matters equally. Everybody needs a philosophy, a general view about the nature of the world and our place in it. Everybody needs a philosophy and everyone has at least a rudimentary one. Some of us struggle continuously to establish personal values and beliefs that help us maintain a balanced view of how the world works. Others simply accept predominant cultural views without question. The great majority of humanity today has accepted a traditional outlook. We here in this room have not.

Humanism tells us that whatever our philosophy may be, the responsibility for the kind of world in which we live rests with us. Humanists hold that knowledge is discovered rather than revealed and should be gained through reason, observation and experience, not accepted as an article of faith. If you agree with that, you might be a Humanist.

Humanism is also about acting positively to move ourselves, our culture and the world toward the better. If you agree with that, you might be a Humanist.

If you love and revel in the sheer glory of life, you might be a Humanist. Humanism is for those who love life, who relish the adventure of being part of new discoveries about themselves and the world of which they are a part.

If you have ever had a peak experience (not that kind of peak experience … well, maybe that kind!) but if you’ve ever had a peak experience you might be a Humanist. For Abraham Maslow, founder of humanistic psychology, reaching a peak experience, a node of feeling fully actualized, was the purpose of life.

If you want to make plateaus of those peaks, if you strive for the extended periods of fulfillment and joy that New Age thinker Ken Wilbur holds out hope for and that most of us have had a time or two in our lives—if you long to live in that state of complete actualization, you just might be a Humanist.

If you agree with Protagoras that "the human is the measure of all things" or with Sophocles that of all the many wonders of the world there is "none so wonderful as the human," then you might be a Humanist.

My mission is not to convince or convert. I am not here to attempt to tell you what to believe, Humanism doesn’t do that. I’m here to ask you what you are, to help you discover if you are indeed a Humanist. I’ll begin by framing Humanism in its basics, go through some of the history of the development of Humanism, offer a definition of Humanism in today’s language, and explore how Humanism informs and gives meaning to our lives.

I am both an Ethical Culturist and a Humanist and there is nothing at all contradictory about that. The two are different in organizational style and history, but completely complementary in philosophy and wholly compatible in practice … they even fit together institutionally. But for the purposes of identity today, I speak as a Humanist and address you as Ethical Culturists. Even though I believe us to be one. But I’ll let you be the judge of that after you’ve heard what I have to say.

Whether or not you’re an avowed, out-and-out, out-of-the-closet, card-carrying Humanist as I am, we are alike. You and I share many ideas and values, and we came to them in much the same way. Like Ethical Culture, there is no central dogma to Humanism. Each Humanist must define his or her own beliefs.

So, four areas to address: The basics of Humanism, historic development, modern definition, and meaning today.

Let me kind of block out Humanism without quite defining it. I’ll do that later. Boiled right down to it, Humanism is trust in humanity’s ability and responsibility to cope with life. Democracy, human rights and responsibilities, self-endowed meaning, and a naturalistic outlook, all based in an ethics derived from human need and experience, are the hallmarks of Humanism. If that draws you, you might be a Humanist.

Humanists have a deep love for life and an ambition to live it well and fully. We respect the worth and dignity of the individual, and long for the dignity of living our lives in harmony with each other without bias or egocentric motive.

Humanism is concerned wholly with this life, and regards individuals as responsible for their own lives. It holds that each life has meaning in and of itself, and is significant to the extent the world is a better place because you have been here. If you can sign on to that, you might be a Humanist.

Humanism views truth not as absolute but as relative and often transitory in its evolution; Humanism derives its truth through the use of critical inquiry, reason and scientific method; and gives it meaning through experience. We are acutely aware of what we do not know, are comfortable with that unawareness in a belief that perhaps someday we will know, and are patient in this life while waiting to know.

This last point, about not knowing, is a nuanced distinction between the stance of Humanism and that of Ethical Culture. Practically, it is a distinction without a difference. Philosophically, there is no such thing. I sometimes think philosophers exist to make mountains out of molehills … to create large differences where small ones exist.

I am executive director of the American Humanist Association. I was hired as an administrator, not a philosopher, and I’m about to prove it, so bear with me.

Ethical Culture treats questions of origin and destiny, and other metaphysical concerns, with benign neglect. To me, one of Felix Adler’s most courageous stands was to say simply, it doesn’t matter … I don’t care. I don’t care where, if anywhere, we come from or where, if anywhere, we’re going. I care about this life. I care about you.

Humanism addresses these matters with a staunch and unwavering agnosticism … we don’t know and we’re certain we don’t know. We’re also, as I said, comfortable in not knowing. This is probably the most central difference and it doesn’t amount to much.

Ethical Culture, on this point, is a sort of applied apathy while Humanism is a comfortable acceptance of our present limitations. One doesn’t know; the other doesn’t care. If you claim both distinctions, Ethical Culturist and Humanist as I do, you can proudly and confidently proclaim, "I don’t know and I don’t care!"

But the important point is that both views focus on the present, on this life, and how we live it in relation to each other and our surroundings, of which we are both a part of and depend upon. And both have as their goal to leave the world a better place than we found it.

Another similarity is that Humanism, like Ethical Culture, has as one of its central tenets a strong sense of personal responsibility. This is not unique to our perspectives. It was a Unitarian, Scott Alexander, who spoke of "a moral and ethical faith which believes it matters ultimately that human persons and communities work wisely, compassionately and tirelessly to live together in a humane and ethical fashion." He was describing Humanism, but his remarks apply equally to Ethical Culture.

The epic of Humanism has had three significant chapters. The first is actually a preface, and the other two kind of blend into a single volume with a lot of sub-sections. The three are the time of the ancient and revered Greek philosophers; the Renaissance; and the modern era which began with a revival about 150 years ago and continues progressing today. There were other developments so it’s actually been a pretty constant, though somewhat jerky flow since about 1500.

The early strands of what we now call Humanism can be found in Socrates’ plea for an "examined life" two and a half millennia ago. The individualism of Humanism dates back to that time and is exemplified in each and every unique construction of personal beliefs since.

Socrates equated virtue with the knowledge of one's true self, and spent his life seeking wisdom about right conduct so that he could guide the moral and intellectual improvement of Athens. Felix Adler, the founder of Ethical Culture, spent his life in the same pursuit. These are worthy ambitions that form the foundation of Ethical Culture and of Humanism.

It was Aristotle who first introduced what I spoke of before, and will speak of again, the concept of happiness, of the good life as life’s purpose. Since then it has been in and out of philosophical fashion several times, but the battle over what constitutes happiness has raged unabated.

Lloyd and Mary Morain spoke to happiness in their recently re-released 1954 classic, Humanism As The Next Step. "As a starting point, let us take the ideal that this life should be experienced deeply, lived fully, with sensitive awareness and appreciation for that which is around us."

In his book The Conquest of Happiness that irascible Humanist, Bertrand Russell, referred to "zest" as "the most universal and distinctive mark" of the happy individual. However you phrase it, Humanists love life and find immense happiness in it. If that appeals to you, you might be a Humanist.

The Renaissance, marked by a return to learning and a rediscovery of the classics, brought renewed efforts toward individual expression and freedom. Based in a profound belief in the greatness to which the human being could aspire, the Humanism of the Renaissance emphasized the power and potential of the human mind. Imbued with the scientific method of exploration and discovery, the dimensions of the human being were opened to future possibilities.

Rooted as it was in the ancient past of their Greek tutors, and certainly elitist in the beginning, the Humanism of the Renaissance was far from a movement, organized or otherwise. Yet the humanistic thinking of the era, with its emphasis on the individual, eventually produced a class of educated lay citizens whose air of self-confidence grew exponentially with their knowledge.

The Humanists of the Renaissance were mostly Christians whose return to the classics was intended to rescue religion from medieval corruption. It did that, to some degree, but more significantly it forever altered the landscape of higher ideals. Their focus on humanity rather than divinity wrested idealism from the clutches of mythology and firmly imbedded it in human experience. That was a very significant accomplishment.

The postulates of the Renaissance were polished throughout the Enlightenment. The word "Humanism" as we now use it began gaining currency in the middle of the 19^th century. Though they lived earlier, the thinking of the likes of Newton and Kant, as well as others, sprung forth in full bloom about the same time, a century and a half ago—around the time Felix Adler was born. That’s when modern Humanism began to emerge.

This progression of Humanism that began with the revival of the classics in the Renaissance, and grew through the Reformation and the Enlightenment, matured into Humanist Manifesto I in 1933, and Humanist Manifesto II in 1973. But Corlis Lamont perhaps best epitomized it in his epic, The Philosophy of Humanism. Now in its eighth edition, it first appeared in 1949.

If that makes your heart sing—and how could it not?—you just might be a Humanist.

To tie these basics together, let me read the Minimum Statement on Humanism issued by the International Humanist and Ethical Union. And, by the way, the Ethical Culture movement is the "ethical" in the International Humanist and Ethical Union. You are an important player in the Humanist movement today, and have been for a long, long time. The IHEU was founded in 1952 but the Minimum Statement is a recent work drafted by the current president of the IHEU, Levi Fragell of Norway. This is the original version adopted by the IHEU board in Prague in 1991.

Notice it does not flatly reject the possibility of things we do not have sufficient evidence to support, it simply says we do not use them to interpret the things we do accept as reality. Note also that this is not a creed every Humanist must accept, nor do they. It’s an open-ended, progressive statement from which Humanists may draw what they may.

It is truly a minimum statement, so let me read it again:

Harold Blackham was a mover of note in the British Ethical Union. In 1954 he wrote in his Essentials of Humanism, "Humanism … is a body of conviction about reason and science, freedom and morality, ideals and values, which requires commitment, choice and action, for it requires the creation of a personal life of one’s own—and of a world, a humanist civilization. Therefore, humanism is a call to all, a vision of what is to be achieved."

Humanists are dedicated to the application of reason and observation, the scientific method, to an understanding of the universe and to the solving of human problems. We are engaged in art no less than science, environment no less than ethics, and culture and tradition no less than modernism and rationality. Julian Huxley defined Humanism as, "human control by human effort in accordance with human ideals."

One of the niggling points about Humanism, and about Ethical Culture is, Just what is it? Is it a philosophy? Can it be a religion? Arnold Ruge settled that for me when he said, "… real Humanism has to abolish neither philosophy nor religion, but to establish a new system for both." Humanism does that in embracing both the intellectual and the emotional aspects of our existence in a practical, meaningful way. Roger Lloyd said, "Humanism is ultimately a philosophy and an attitude toward life. … that exalts humankind as we are and as we might be."

I like the words Kenneth Phifer used in consideration of likes and differences of various ways of thought. "Ultimately, of course, the name does not matter. … What matters is that we join with each other in seeking to do justice and to love mercy, walking humbly with one another in full respect of the preciousness and worth of every human life."

That’s what Humanists do. And if that’s what you want to do, it’s pretty hard to deny you’re a Humanist.

The practical benefit of Humanism is that it holds out hope for a peaceful, sustainable world.

On a personal level, Humanism replaces a sense of isolation in an indifferent world with a feeling of being a meaningful part of all that is. It gives life direction and purpose, tempering impatient and often desperate idealism with confidence in ones unaided ability to contribute to a better world.

Humanism provides values that guide us in making choices, and offers hope in times of difficulty. The compassion of Humanism is as broad as our understanding of that to which it connects us. Its truth is ever expanding. That’s how Humanism plays out in our lives—through these simple though not simplistic beliefs.

Humanism offers refuge in an ever-changing world of uncertainty where the truths we were raised with no longer apply. The old story, the account of how we fit into the world, is no longer effective. We need something new to rely on, something to reassure us. We need to know that we have a place in the world and that we are accepted for who we are. Humanism offers that security and more.

Earlier I spoke of the unabated battle over the nature of happiness. This seems like as good a time as any to leap fearlessly into that fray with a Humanist perspective.

The promise of Humanism is happiness and the good life here and now, but the promise is not a complete or perfect one. Our lives demonstrate that we as humans are not perfect, and evolution teaches that we are not complete. Humanism is on the growing tip of thought, and continues urging our society toward positive development.

For Humanists, happiness is not a possession but a way of being. As Ed Ericson, Ethical Culturist extraordinaire and past leader of the New York and Washington Ethical Societies, put it in his book The Humanist Way, "Happiness in any enduring, meaningful sense is the outcome of growth to personal maturity." It is not given to us. We must work at it.

Happiness is for now, for us—but also for others and for the span of humankind. Leo Katz of the Long Island Ethical Society said, "Humanism requires being in touch with all of yourself, but acting in accordance with the better part of yourself." As Humanists, we do not ascribe these better elements of existence to an abstract personification, but rather recognize them as aspects of ourselves, what we think of as our higher self.

One of the most exhilarating things about Humanism is that despite its long and rich history it is still in its infancy! It’s on the leading edge of progressive thought and belief. Humanism today is both progeny and progenitor; heir to and realization of the Renaissance, the Reformation, the Enlightenment, and the democratic revolution; promise and provoker of a better tomorrow.

In closing, I want to offer one of my favorite passages on Humanism. It was written by Fred Edwords, editor of the Humanist magazine.

If you find assuming a share of the responsibility for the destiny of humanity inspiring and meaningful, you are a Humanist.