Humanists strongly believe that humankind must take responsibility for improving the world, and increasingly today for protecting the environment that sustains us all. For humanists, human rights, fairness and social justice are right and necessary because they contribute to human fulfilment and happiness and because people suffer in their absence; care for the environment is important because we and other species depend on it, and future generations will suffer if we allow it to degrade too far or exhaust Earth’s resources.

Humanists bring an emphasis on evidence, experience and reason into any discussion on global issues. Humanists take a sceptical view of religious or cultural traditions that limit human potential or cause unnecessary suffering: they would not think an action or convention or rule right simply because it was the tradition or because an authority said it was right. Humanists would demand hard information and reasons for any argument or action on these issues, and might seek evidence or expert opinion, for example, from scientists or philosophers.

One insight that is perhaps particular to humanism is the belief in shared values. Other groups often stress differences – in values, in culture, in beliefs – but for humanists the differences are outweighed by the similarities between people and their needs. Generally, humanists judge actions by their consequences and tend to question orthodoxies, and, unlike some faith groups, they value the contributions to human knowledge and welfare made by science, technology and modern medicine.

Discussions amongst humanists are completely free and impossible to monitor or control. There is no central authority to decide on global or other issues, but a shared humanist perspective often emerges from rational, evidence-based discussion. For example, although a few humanists thought that the 2005 Make Poverty History campaign was vacuous “motherhood and apple pie” (and in the light of hindsight they may well have been right), there was little or no opposition to Humanists UK (known as the British Humanist Association at the time) signing up to it; few, if any, humanists think that desperate poverty and vast inequalities of wealth are good things – because they are obvious causes of unhappiness and suffering, preventing flourishing and fulfilment.

Humanist organisations usually try to find a consensus, and / or rely on their trustees and staff to decide policy rationally. Where there is no consensus, for example, on pacifism or the Iraq war, or the task is beyond the remit of the organisation, for example, feeding the hungry, it is left to individual humanists to either join with others outside organised humanism to work for a cause or campaign, or to find humanists of a similar mind to work with. Humanist organisations and individuals also rely on expert advice, for example from philosophers and scientists.

Humanism, like some religions, is global and so may have global contacts and insights into different cultures and perspectives. Religious believers may well, if their judgements on global issues are based on experience, reason and empathy, come to very similar conclusions to humanists about the problems and possible solutions. Sometimes, even though their rationales are very different, humanists and religious believers arrive at similar positions; for example, humanists may be motivated to do something about global warming by concern for the future of humanity in a degraded environment and / or aesthetic and emotional losses as species die out, and religious believers may be motivated by an obligation to look after “God’s creation” – but the results, in awareness and action on environmental problems, may be the same.

On the other hand, humanists do not think that insights and actions based solely on tradition or religious authorities or theological arguments, can be sound. For example, humanists have ideas very different from those of some religious believers about the role of women and the use of contraception and prophylactics against HIV/AIDS, and are very critical of the damage done in Africa by religiously-motivated aid workers who promote abstinence as the only way of preventing pregnancy or STDs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moncure_Conway

http://newhumanist.org.uk/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/atheism/types/humanism.shtml

https://heritage.humanists.uk/

http://www.humanism.org.uk

https://humanists.international/

http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/athval0.htm

https://understandinghumanism.org.uk/

https://understandinghumanism.org.uk/conway-hall-virtual-tour/

https://understandinghumanism.org.uk/res_films/one-life-live-it-well/

https://understandinghumanism.org.uk/school-speakers/

https://humanists.international/get-involved/resources/humanist-prism/

https://heritage.humanists.uk/

Like many of the world’s religions, humanism values human happiness and flourishing and the morality of the ‘golden rule’: “Treat other people as you would like to be treated yourself”. The 20th century humanist philosopher, A J Ayer, described the basis of humanist values in ‘The Humanist Outlook’, 1968: “The only possible basis for a sound morality is mutual tolerance and respect: tolerance of one another’s customs and opinions; respect for one another’s rights and feelings; awareness of one another’s needs.”

Humanists see the source of all moral values in shared human nature and needs. Human nature includes the abilities to understand and empathise with others and to learn from experience, and human needs include security and friendship. Even those values that are not directly concerned with human relationships, for example those that influence how we treat other species or the environment, are founded in human needs – for a safe and sustaining Earth, for the pleasures of seeing and interacting with the natural world.

Many humanists agree with the utilitarian principle expressed by 19th century philosopher John Stuart Mill: “Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.”

Within humanism there are few, if any, rules, just the hope or expectation that humanists will try to live by the general principles outlined above and base their values and behaviour on reason and experience rather than on unthinking obedience, prejudice or fear. In the wider community, humanists have been influenced by the concept of human rights, which supports the humanist viewpoint that there are universal moral values shared by everyone, regardless of race, culture or religion. Many humanists, for example, support Amnesty International and other human rights organisations.

There are no sacred texts in humanism and, although some humanists do choose to get together, meetings do not involve worship or reading specific texts. (See also the page on “Worship”.) Although many humanists have their own favourite supportive texts and influences (see Bibliography below for some examples), they contain little specialist language and have no particular status or authority within humanism; indeed humanists are very likely to argue about their relative merits.

Although there is nothing in humanism analogous to a sacred text, there have been many thinkers and books either reflecting a humanist philosophy or helping to influence or develop it. Very early examples include Confucius, Democritus, Epictetus, Epicurus, Protagorus and Cicero, but it was probably the 18th century thinkers of the European Enlightenment, for example, Immanuel Kant, David Hume, Thomas Paine, Voltaire, Mary Wollstonecraft, Baron D’Holbach, and Denis Diderot, who did the most to advance modern thinking about secular morality, though they would not at the time have called this humanism.

The 19th century brought developments in biblical scholarship and in science which undermined the historical accuracy and literal truth of the Bible for many people, and further influential thinking about rational, atheistic moral values, for example the Utilitarianism of philosopher John Stuart Mill.

20th and 21st century intellectuals built on these influences, to the point where humanist thinking is the implicit basis of much public discourse, though often unacknowledged. This lack of acknowledgment, and various contemporary religious reactions against humanism and secularism, are likely to have been behind the recent phenomenon of very assertive and popular defences of atheism exemplified by Richard Dawkins and A C Grayling.

It has to be stressed, however, that any thoughtful person can arrive at humanist ideas and principles by reflection alone – no reading or authority is required. Reading, for humanists, can be very supportive, demonstrating that there are, and always have been, others who share and articulate a humanist worldview, but it is not essential.

No text has any particular authority for humanists, and there is no special humanist interpretation or analysis of texts, though since the 19th century humanists from the Christian tradition have been strongly influenced by the scholarly analyses of the Bible mentioned above.

Humanists use and may be inspired by poetry and poetic and figurative language (for example, it is often forgotten that Richard Dawkins’ famous phrase “selfish gene” is a metaphor), but it has no distinctive humanist meaning.

Humanists are sceptics about revelation, and consider all texts and authorities to be human rather than divine in origin (a viewpoint that some religions might see as itself an interpretation). Humanists think that wisdom can be found in many places, but that even the most respected thinkers and books may be superseded as new evidence emerges and knowledge advances.

‘Humanism is about the world, not about humanism’, wrote one of the founders of modern humanism, Harold Blackham, in 1968, emphasising its capacity to look outwards. In many countries, humanism supports secular, non-traditional values and developments that help to improve lives, for example human rights, the education of girls and family planning.

Some of the things that humanists value include reason, education, personal autonomy and equality of opportunity. Like most other people, they value honesty, kindness, love, friendship and families, but unlike some, they are often very accepting of non-traditional families. A humanist would think it worthwhile to debunk harmful beliefs or superstitions, as humanists do in India, for example, or to fight discrimination against minorities or gay people, as they have done in many places. These general models of “worth” are exemplified in the lives of individual humanists, some of whom have been very distinguished in their fields and can be read about on various humanist websites. Humanists are just as likely to work in the “caring professions” or to do voluntary work or give to charity as religious believers.

Here is a list of humanists who have been actively involved in anti-racism and some suggested works (some recent some more historical)

James Baldwin, American novelist and activist

See The Fire Next Time and other works

Video clip: www.facebook.com/watch/?v=260083205058947

Richard Wright, author

See Native Son (fiction)

Ta Nehisi Coates, author and journalist

See Between the World and Me

Zadie Smith

Contempt as a virus (essay)

Kenan Malik, writer and lecturer

In The Meaning of Race (1996) Malik ‘throws new light on the nature and origins of ideas of racial difference. Arguing that the concept of ‘race’ is a means through which Western society has come to understand the relationship between humanity, society and nature, the book re-examines the relationship between Enlightenment thought and racial discourse, clarifies the nature of scientific racism, and presents a critique of postmodern theories of cultural ‘difference’.’ [Google Books]

Adam Rutherford, How to Argue with a Racist

Adam Rutherford is a geneticist and author. How to Argue with a Racist: History, Science, Race and Reality takes aim at pseudoscientific arguments used to justify racism and racial stereotypes, both historically and today, using biology – and socio-economics – to challenge the harmful use of racist tropes presented as fact.

Watch: How to Argue with a Racist

Some other info on humanists and anti-racism

John Amichi, Patron of Humanists UK

Video clip for schools: Not-racist v anti-racist: What’s the difference?: www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/articles/zs9n2v4

Asa Philip Randolph, Civil Rights leader

Asa Philip Randolph was a civil rights leader who campaigned for racial equality in the workplace. He organised the March on Washington in 1963 at which Martin Luther King delivered his ‘I have a dream’ speech.

‘This condition of freedom, equality, and democracy is not the gift of gods. It is the task of men, yes, men, brave men, honest men, determined men.’

First Universal Races Congress

The First Universal Races Congress took place in London 26-29 July 1911: the first ever conference of its kind. The Congress sought to challenge racial divisions in the light of social and scientific understanding, pre-dating comparable efforts by international bodies such as UNESCO by four decades. Developed from an idea suggested by Felix Adler at a meeting of the International Union of Ethical Societies (a precursor of today’s Humanists International) in 1906, the Congress was principally organised by Gustav Spiller, drawing attendees from across the world.

heritage.humanists.uk/first-universal-races-congress

W.E.B. du Bois

Lifelong anti-racist activist and writer on racial inequality. Castigated the Church for its role in upholding racist ideals and institutions (e.g. slavery).

Albert Einstein

Einstein drew on his own experience of anti-semitism to decry racism. During the 1930s and 1940s, while living in America, Einstein joined civil rights organisations including the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the American Crusade Against Lynching (ACAL), acting as co-chair for the latter, and lobbying for federal anti-lynching legislation alongside its founder Paul Robeson. In a commencement address for the historically black Lincoln University, he described racism as ‘a disease of white people’.

How Albert Einstein Used His Fame to Denounce American Racism

A.J. Ayer was Chairman of the Campaign Against Racial Discrimination in Sport

Barbara Wootton

‘In case of fire or shipwreck no one stops to inquire into the intelligence quotient, the character, or (one hopes) the social status or racial origins of those whose lives are at stake, in order to give priority to those of higher standing. At such times all are treated as equal, preference being given only to those least able to help themselves. But we have yet to learn that what is good in emergency is no less good in everyday life.’

More can be found on the Humanist Heritage website: https://heritage.humanists.uk/

 

Humanist beliefs impact on humanists’ lives in the following ways:

• Humanists try to live good lives by the light of reason and experience, rather than by relying on tradition or authority;
• Humanists try to avoid hypocrisy and tend to be disinclined to compromise over matters such as participating in worship or calling themselves “Christians” for convenience;
• For this reason, humanists have developed their own ceremonies to mark the significant stages of life. However, there are no obligatory rituals, practices or texts for humanists;
• Humanists may feel rather isolated if they have arrived at their beliefs independently, as many do, and if they never learn about humanism or discover other humanists or humanist organisations;
• Humanists may be discriminated against in various ways, though this depends very much on the society they live in. Even in our relatively secular and tolerant society, they are often told that religious believers are morally superior to them, or that humanism has no place in education.

The benefits to individuals of learning about humanism and defining themselves as humanists include:

• Finding philosophical and practical support for their deeply held beliefs and values;
• Finding a positive way to describe themselves and their worldview, instead of a negative like “atheist” which simply describes what they do not believe, or “agnostic”, which implies that they don’t know what they believe. “Humanist” includes a moral perspective and a respect for human life and human capacities;
• Increased confidence in their values from the realisation that they are not alone, that many great thinkers over the ages have expressed humanist beliefs.

The benefits to communities and to the world from atheists and agnostics learning that their beliefs need not be purely negative ones, that moral values are not unique to the religions, and that there are rational reasons for trying to live a good life, must be considerable. Humanists have always worried that an over-close identification between religion and morality would encourage some non-believers to think that morality has nothing to do with them.

In living with integrity by their humanist values, sometimes at some personal cost, the figures described above offer humanists good examples of how to live. They were characterised by a belief in the power of reason, which gave them the strength and motivation to speak out against the orthodoxies of their day, and none of them resorted to violence. Their values remain relevant today, as many of the ideas and freedoms they struggled for remain out of reach for large numbers of people.

Humanism, with its emphasis on shared values based on shared humanity and on thinking for oneself, encourages and supports the independence of thought and empathy with others exemplified in many of the people mentioned above. For humanists the meaning of life lies in making the best possible use of our lives and our abilities – and these and many other humanists have done just that.

Humanists would locate the source of their inspiration in those aspects of the human character (or “spirit”) that make them question conventions, and courageous or stubborn enough to stand up for what they believe to be right. One may be born with these qualities or they may be attributed to culture, education or upbringing, but they are human and natural rather than supernatural in origin.

Humanists rarely, if ever, attain positions of authority or influence in society as a direct result of their humanism, though humanist beliefs and values may well inform their choices of career and how they use authority and influence once achieved. But no individual humanist has authority over other humanists or can claim to represent them adequately in the public sphere. The development of humanist organisations around the world provides humanists with a public voice and representation to public authorities and governments.

Humanist organisations are democratic and egalitarian, usually run by representatives of their members and answerable to them as well as to institutions such as the Charity Commission in the UK. Their success is evaluated by members on grounds such as: Are they providing the services needed by members and the wider non-religious community? Are they responding to public affairs in the ways that members require? Are they recognised and respected as the public face of humanism?

Humanism had a much more gradual, less defined foundation than most religions, with few “leaders”. However, humanist ideas are part of a long and influential tradition of scepticism and belief in a non-religious basis for morality, and humanists have often been very active in world events.

Influential or inspirational thinkers from this sceptical, humanist tradition range from figures from ancient history such as Confucius, Cicero and Epicurus to contemporaries such Carl Sagan, Peter Singer and Richard Dawkins, with many, many in the centuries between. Their influence goes well beyond humanism.

Humanists have contributed to human welfare through science and medicine, including the discoverers of radium Marie and Pierre Curie, Professor Sir Anthony Epstein, one of the discoverers of the Epstein-Barr virus and Professor Sir Alec Jeffreys, discoverer of DNA fingerprinting. Others such as writers John Fowles, Ian McEwan, Terry Pratchett, Philip Pullman, and poets Alan Brownjohn and Maureen Duffy, have inspired through the arts. Many humanists have been active in politics, peace movements, the formation of the United Nations, and in campaigns for equality and autonomy.

Some key figures helped to establish the Ethical Churches which eventually, in Britain, evolved into the British Humanist Association. One of the founders of the British Ethical Society movement, Moncure Conway, started his career in America as a Unitarian minister. He fell out with his family over slavery and was dismissed in 1856 from his church over his abolitionist stance. In 1863, he came to London where he became the minister of the South Place Chapel, but he abandoned theism after one of his sons died, and he and his congregation eventually broke from the Unitarian Church. In the 1880s, led by Stanton Coit (who at his American university was called “the most sceptical man in our class but also the most spiritual”), the South Place Chapel evolved into the Ethical Church and then Ethical Society, but Coit continued using the word God to indicate the noblest good, and referred to “the Religion of Humanism”.

A more political, campaigning secularist was Charles Bradlaugh, who became Britain’s first openly atheist MP when he was elected by the voters of Northampton in 1880. As an atheist, he was not allowed to swear allegiance on the Bible or to affirm (a right which did not then exist) and so could not take up his seat in Parliament. Eventually, after he had been re-elected several times, he was allowed to swear allegiance, and the episode led to a change in the law allowing non-religious affirmations the same legal status as religious oaths.

It was still possible in the 1950s to shock Britain by saying, as humanist psychologist Margaret Knight did, that the moral education of children was too important to be built on the shaky foundations of religion. She and others such as Harold Blackham, A J Ayer and Julian Huxley were important in the mid-20th century as leaders of and advisers to the newly-formed British Humanist Association.

Though these 19th and 20th century figures were important in the development of humanism and humanist organisations, it has to be admitted that many humanists know little or nothing about them. Although humanists may have benefited from their work and campaigns, they could not be said to be directly influenced by them.

These and many others exemplify humanist moral and spiritual values such as searching for the truth, belief in human equality and shared values, and working actively for peace, progress and human welfare.