Foundations of a Value System
“Humanism is a broad category of active ethical philosophies that affirm the dignity and worth of all people, based on our ability to determine what is right using the qualities innate to humanity, particularly rationality. Humanism is a component of a variety of more specific philosophical systems.”
The opposing view: Anti-humanism.
My own interpretation is that humanism is a prescriptive (and optimistic) proposal for human behaviour and culture, whereas anti-humanism is a descriptive (and pessimistic) interpretation of human behaviour and culture. The central point of contention is a re-statement of one of the oldest of arguments in philosophy: freedom versus determinism. The source of contention seems to be the conscious desire to change the world, vis a vis human nature. Humanists are interested in human potential. Anti-humanists seems to be interested in how humans actually are, and reject any proposal that we can change of our own accord, i.e. by conscious choice or effort.
I think that both attitudes are simplistic. I have a great sympathy with the tenets and hopes of humanism. However, I also feel the sense of powerlessness in the oppressive enormity of the juggernaut which is history. Great forces, some of which are called evil, but which I call merely nature, carry individual human beings along in their current. Some of these forces find their origins in the very nature of human beings, but it is their collective power which shapes societies. The workings of societies follow the precepts of the lowest common denominator of human values, and are the most immediate threat to those higher values which humanism attempts to further.
Thus it is the imperative of humanism to raise the bar of human values starting with those who are willing to act on their own as though the higher goals of humanism are attainable. It is, however, difficult for a small number of people to raise a pillar of hope under the great oppressive canvas of fear and ignorance that attempts to smother humanity. To further humanist goals, better tools are required than simply optimistic language and incidental acts. As the human population of the earth continues to grow, and the average age of human beings gets lower, overcoming ignorance becomes a more and more difficult goal. People take time to learn, and devoid of minimal security, they necessarily act in such a way to ensure their own survival, and the survival of their offspring, leaving little time to consider more complex goals. Poverty, lack of education and overpopulation thus continue to be major obstacles to a humanist future.
But what are the obstacles to the eradication of poverty and ignorance? The arrogance and self-importance of the wealthy. Ironically, the wealthy minority of human beings have access to all of the education they could want, but they ignore their opportunities in favour of furthering their own egos and other appetites. Human beings in the twenty-first century, or at least the cultural climate in which they live and with which they identify, place individual satisfactions above all other goals. Selfishness dominates our society. How can the humanist agenda, which necessarily requires self-restraint, progress in the face of such self-indulgence?