Jump to content

Secular humanism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dacoutts (talk | contribs) at 03:16, 2 March 2006 (→Secular humanism today: restore mention of humansim belief system) which is both nontheistic and secular, therefore very relevant to this section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Secular humanism is a humanist philosophy that upholds reason, ethics, and justice, specifically rejects rituals and ceremonies as a means to affirm their life stance. The term was coined in the 20th century to make a clear distinction from "religious humanism". A perhaps less confrontational synonym is scientific humanism, which the biologist Edward O. Wilson termed "the only worldview compatible with science's growing knowledge of the real world and the laws of nature". [1]

Secular humanism is distinguished from the broader category of humanism in that the secular humanist specifically rejects rituals and ceremonies as a means to affirm their life stance. Secular humanism has appeal to atheists, agnostics, freethinkers, empiricists, objectivists, rationalists, skeptics and materialists, as well as to some Buddhists, Hindus and Confucians.

Its basic tenets may be summarized as:

  • Humans have inherent value and can solve human problems
  • All knowledge is gained through rational process (the supernatural is denied)
  • Science and rational thought are enhanced through democracy and free speech

Secular humanism and secularism represent overlapping concepts with somewhat different connotations. Both advocate a non-supernatural focus. The former suggests a belief in human dignity, while usages of the latter emphasize limits on the role of religious or supernatural considerations in the affairs of society or government.


Secular humanism today

While secular humanist organizations are found in all parts of the world, one of the largest humanist organisations in the world (relative to population) is Norway's Human-Etisk Forbund [2], which had over 69,000 members out of a population of around 4.6 million in 2004 [3].

In certain areas of the world, secular humanism finds itself in conflict with religious fundamentalism, especially over the issue of the separation of church and state. Many secular humanists tend to judge religions as superstitious, regressive and closed minded, while religious fundamentalists may see secular humanism as a threat to the values they say are set out in religious texts, such as the Bible and the Qur'an.

Atheists and agnostics are generally seen as supporters of secular humanism, though they may not always be - either through ignorance of it, apathy or even disagreement with some of its tenets.

A Secular Humanist Declaration was an argument for and statement of belief in Democratic Secular Humanism. The document was issued in 1980 by The Council for Democratic and Secular Humanism ("CODESH"), now the Council for Secular Humanism ("CSH").

Some secular humanists prefer the term [[Humanist {belief system]], which is a non-theistic and secular belief system.

The earliest documented use of the phrase "secular humanism" was in the United States Supreme Court case Torcaso v. Watkins. In the 1961 decision, Justice Hugo Black commented in a footnote, "Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism, and others." Such footnotes, known as obiter dicta, are simply the personal observations of the judge, and hence are only incidental to reaching the opinion.

The footnote in Torcaso v. Watkins referenced Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda,[4] a 1957 case in which an organization of humanists[5]

sought a tax exemption on the ground that they used their property "solely and exclusively for religious worship." Despite the group's non-theistic beliefs, the court determined that the activities of the Fellowship of Humanity, which included weekly Sunday meetings, were analogous to the activities of theistic churches and thus entitled to an exemption.

The Fellowship of Humanity case itself referred to humanism but did not mention the term secular humanism. Nonetheless, this case was apparently the reason for the inclusion of Secular Humanism in the list of religions in Justice Black's note.

The implication that secular humanism is a religion has been seized upon by religious opponents of the teaching of the Theory of Evolution, who have made the argument that teaching evolution amounts to teaching a religious idea.

The claim that secular humanism could be considered a religion for legal purposes was examined by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Peloza v. Capistrano School District in 1994. In this case, a science teacher argued that, by requiring him to teach evolution, his school district was forcing him to teach the "religion" of secular humanism. The Court responded, "We reject this claim because neither the Supreme Court, nor this circuit, has ever held that evolutionism or secular humanism are 'religions' for Establishment Clause purposes." The Supreme Court refused to review the case.

The decision for a subsequent case, Kalka v. Hawk et al., offered this commentary:[6]

The Court's statement in Torcaso does not stand for the proposition that humanism, no matter in what form and no matter how practiced, amounts to a religion under the First Amendment. The Court offered no test for determining what system of beliefs qualified as a "religion" under the First Amendment. The most one may read into the Torcaso footnote is the idea that a particular non-theistic group calling itself the "Fellowship of Humanity" qualified as a religious organization under California law.

Another case often cited as establishing secular humanism as a religion under the law is the 1957 tax case of Washington Ethical Society v. District of Columbia (101 U.S. App. D.C. 371). The Washington Ethical Society functions much like a church, but regards itself as a non-theistic religious institution, honoring the importance of ethical living without mandating a belief in a supernatural origin for ethics. The case involved denial of the Society's application for tax exemption as a religious organization. The U.S. Court of Appeals reversed the Tax Court's ruling, defined the Society as a religious organization, and granted its tax exemption. The Court stated,

The sole issue raised is whether petitioner falls within the definition of a "church" or a "religious society" . . . . The taxing authority urges denial of the tax exemption asserting petitioner is not a religious society or church and that it does not use its buildings for religious worship since "religious" and "worship" require a belief in and teaching of a Supreme Being who controls the universe. The position of the tax Court, in denying tax exemption, was that belief in and teaching of the existence of a Divinity is essential to qualify under the statute. . . . To construe exemptions so strictly that unorthodox or minority forms of worship would be denied the exemption benefits granted to those conforming to the majority beliefs might well raise constitutional issues . . . . We hold on this record and under the controlling statutory language petitioner qualifies as "a religious corporation or society" . . . .

The Society terms its practice Ethical Culture. Though Ethical Culture is based on a humanist philosophy, Ethical Culture is regarded by some as a type of religious humanism. Hence, it would seem most accurate to say that this case affirmed that a religion need not be theistic to qualify as a religion under the law, rather than asserting that it established generic secular humanism as a religion.

In the cases of both the Fellowship of Humanity and the Washington Ethical Society, the court decisions turned not so much on the particular beliefs of practitioners as on the function and form of the practice being similar to the function and form of the practices in other religious institutions.

Despite the details of these particular cases, there is a perception among some Christians in the U.S. that secular humanism—and by association secularism—has been granted religious status for tax purposes, that secularism in government and in the schools constitutes state favoritism towards a particular religion, and that denials of the latter by the courts constitute a double standard.

This interpretation is disputed by secularists, who argue that the non-religious nature of secularism is not contradicted by the fact that some groups adopt tenets of humanism as part of their religion. ("Just because people count something in what they say is their religion does not make it inherently religious. If some people start worshipping chairs chairs shouldn't be kept out of school.")

Other modern and historical references

The term secularism was created in 1846 by George Jacob Holyoake in order to describe "a form of opinion which concerns itself only with questions, the issues of which can be tested by the experience of this life."

As mentioned previously, secular humanism was a term used by Justice Black to refer to non-theistic humanist religion. The term was seized upon by religious fundamentalists, often to cast humanists as anti-religious.

By the 1970s the term was embraced by humanists who, although critical of religion in its various guises, were deliberately non-religious, as opposed to anti-religious, which means that it has nothing to do with spiritual, religious, or ecclesiastical doctrines, beliefs, or power structures. This understanding of secular Humanism is the most common today.

Historical use of the term humanism (reflected in some current academic usage), is related to the writings of pre-Socratic philosophers. These writings were lost to obscurity until Renaissance scholars rediscovered and translated them into modern language. Thus the term humanist can mean a humanities scholar, as well as refer to The Enlightenment/ Renaissance intellectuals, and those who have agreement with the pre-Socratics, as distinct from secular humanists.

In a mockery of an Alabama judge's reference to secular humanism as a religion, musician and free speech advocate Frank Zappa established the "Church of American Secular Humanism."

Notable secular humanists

Some notable secular humanists are

Secular humanism manifestos

There are numerous Humanist Manifestos and Declarations:

See also

Footnotes

  1. ^ in Harvard Magazine December 2005 p 33.
  2. ^ } Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda, 153 Cal.App.2d 673, 315 P.2d 394 (1957).
  3. ^ Ben Kalka v Kathleen Hawk, et al. (US D.C. Appeals No. 98-5485, 2000)
  4. ^ Ibid.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Secular_humanism&oldid=41848408"