There was a period of several years between the point when I accepted my lack of religious belief and the point in which I referred to myself as a Humanist/Secular Humanist. I honestly didn't know how to refer to myself, and I probably would not have settled on anything if it weren't for the fact that I kept running into situations where I was asked about my religious affiliation. Human beings love to classify things, including ourselves, and each other.
Those several years where I wasn't sure how to classify my religious views were not unlike trying to self-diagnose a nagging chronic illness. (To extend the metaphor, as a formerly religious person, it did feel at times that something was wrong with me.) Most of us have plugged symptoms into a search engine in order to pinpoint a diagnosis. And most of us have been overwhelmed with the array of returned possibilities. There was atheism, agnosticism, pantheism, Humanism, and Universalist-Unitarianism. There was Ignosticism, Skeptcism, Secularism, Naturalism, and so on. And to complicate matters, many of the aforementioned philosophies have any number of definitions, or serve as an umbrella for any number of other, more specific philosophies.
At about the same the time that I was starting to figure out how to classify my beliefs, or lack of beliefs, Atheism was beginning to see a surge, specifically in bookstores, as tomes by Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, and Christopher Hitchens enjoyed considerable success (and ignited quite a few discussions in the media). Although these books were instrumental in making non-belief less of a taboo (and helping non-believers feel less of a minority), their perceived antagonistic tones, as well as the backlash from religious figures and institutions, only seemed to further associate "Atheism" with negative characteristics.
As someone who has many wonderful religious friends and family members, the last thing I wanted to do was to seem hostile towards religion (something with which I haven't had tremendous success.) Although, I had lost my faith, I had not lost my faith in humanity. In fact, during the period in which I came to terms with my non-belief, my appreciation of humanity, of nature, and of life, grew. I felt that if I had to label myself, I wanted not to focus on what I didn't believe, but rather what I did believe.
The American Humanist Association describes Humanism as follows:
- Humanism is one of those philosophies for people who think for      themselves. There is no area of thought that a Humanist is afraid      to challenge and explore.     
 
- Humanism is a philosophy  focused upon human means for     comprehending reality. Humanists make  no claims to possess or have     access to supposed transcendent  knowledge.     
 
- Humanism is a philosophy of reason and  science in the pursuit     of knowledge. Therefore, when it comes to the  question of the most     valid means for acquiring knowledge of the  world, Humanists reject     arbitrary faith, authority, revelation, and  altered states of     consciousness.     
 
- Humanism is a  philosophy of imagination. Humanists recognize     that intuitive  feelings, hunches, speculation, flashes of     inspiration, emotion,  altered states of consciousness, and even     religious experience,  while not valid means to acquire knowledge,     remain useful sources of  ideas that can lead us to new ways of     looking at the world. These  ideas, after they have been assessed     rationally for their  usefulness, can then be put to work, often as     alternative approaches  for solving problems.     
 
- Humanism is a philosophy for  the here and now. Humanists     regard human values as making sense  only in the context of human     life rather than in the promise of a  supposed life after death.
 
- Humanism is a philosophy  of compassion. Humanist ethics is     solely concerned with meeting  human needs and answering human     problems -- for both the individual and  society -- and devotes no     attention to the satisfaction of the desires  of supposed     theological entities.     
 
- Humanism is a  realistic philosophy. Humanists recognize the     existence of moral  dilemmas and the need for careful consideration     of immediate and  future consequences in moral decision making.     
 
- Humanism  is in tune with the science of today. Humanists     therefore recognize  that we live in a natural universe of great     size and age, that we  evolved on this planet over a long period of     time, that there is no  compelling evidence for a separable "soul,"     and that human beings  have certain built-in needs that effectively     form the basis for any  human-oriented value system.     
 
- Humanism is in tune  with today's enlightened social thought.     Humanists are committed to  civil liberties, human rights,     church-state separation, the  extension of participatory democracy     not only in government but in  the workplace and education, an     expansion of global consciousness  and exchange of products and     ideas internationally, and an  open-ended approach to solving     social problems, an approach that  allows for the testing of new     alternatives.     
 
- Humanism is in tune with new technological developments. Humanists are willing to take part in emerging scientific and technological discoveries in order to exercise their moral influence on these revolutions as they come about, especially in the interest of protecting the environment.
- Humanism is, in sum, a philosophy for those in love with life. Humanists take responsibility for their own lives and relish the adventure of being part of new discoveries, seeking new knowledge, exploring new options. Instead of finding solace in prefabricated answers to the great questions of life, humanists enjoy the open-endedness of a quest and the freedom of discovery that this entails.
If one follows a particular code, and aligns oneself with a philosophy that has a Web presence, a Wikipedia entry, and a presence in the public sphere, then isn't that just like any other faith or religion? That's a perfectly fair question.
The Encyclopedia Britannica defines faith as:
Inner attitude, conviction, or trust relating man to a supreme God or ultimate salvation.If a philosophy of belief system does not concern itself with a god or gods, it isn't a faith. Humanism does not involve entertaining concepts related to the supernatural. It is a naturalistic, nonreligious worldview.
Some might say that, regardless, Humanism certainly smells like faith/religion. I wouldn't deny that there are some similarities. For example, just like religious folks, non-religious folks like to congregate at times with those who share their worldview. The non-religious might form informal groups, or unite behind a particular cause that is important to their worldview. They might lobby for (or oppose) particular legislation due to their worldview in the same way that many religious groups might. They might even seem to evangelize, whether by writing a letter to the editor, sporting a bumper sticker, or promoting the separation of church and state. However, none of these instances are efforts to promote belief in a supernatural being. They are usually efforts to promote critical thinking, to honor the Constitution's Establishment Clause, to stress the need for improved science education, etc.
The Oxford English Dictionary defines Religion as follows (definitions 1-4):
- Action or conduct indicating a belief in, reverence for, and desire to please a divine ruling power; the exercise or practice of rites or observances implying this.
- A particular system of faith and worship.
- Recognition on the part of man of some higher unseen power as having control of his destiny, and as being entitled to obedience, reverence, and worship; the general mental and moral attitude resulting from this belief, with reference to its effect upon the individual or the community; personal or general acceptance of this feeling as a standard of spiritual and practical life.
- Devotion to some principle; a strict fidelity or faithfulness; conscientiousness; pious affection or attachment.
Although I describe myself as a Humanist, I do not attend a church. I don't belong to any formal Humanist organizations. I own no t-shirts or bumper stickers that pronounce my alignment with Humanism. I have no Humanist text. I have no mantra, prayer, or meditation. There are no belief requirements I must meet in order to be part of the Humanist collective. It simply helps to describe who I am and what I do and don't believe. But it also helps to communicate (I hope) that by being godless, I am not without morals, and that I care tremendously about the world in which we live, and the people who inhabit it. I do have faith in people. I have seen the great good, and the unspeakable evils, of which they are capable.
Although I sometimes refrain from quoting Sam Harris, for fear of turning off people who already have a poor impression of him, but he has a great quote that demonstrates the type of faith that Humanists embody:
"I know of no society in human history that ever suffered because its people became too desirous of evidence in support of their core beliefs."
I believe that societies are capable of making decisions based on evidence (and not based on ancient texts or religious doctrine), and that people are capable of acting with the intention of reducing suffering (without relying on scripture).
If that's faith, I'm guilty as charged.

 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment