THE BOULDER SUNDAY CAMERA - GUEST OPINION
June 9, 1985
Your article by Howard Means of The Orlando Sentinel "Secular Humanism: Does anyone know what it is?" dramatically illuminates the general ignorance and obfuscation, both deliberate and unintended, surrounding this important issue of our times. It may be fairly stated that Secular Humanism embraces the noble ideologies common to most religions, to wit, a compassion for the indigent and the helpless; the enactment and preservation of social justice; the general improvement of the human condition; the elimination of famine, disease, war and cruelty, etc. It also contains elements of open-mindedness and philosophical tolerance historically in regrettable short supply in Western religions (Semitic origin faiths: Judaism, Christianity, Islam) but frequently imbedded in at least three of the Eastern religions, Buddhism, Confucianism and (Philosophical) Taoism, insofar as the founders of those latter sects first formulated their respective ethic.
The Secular Humanist Declaration advanced by Paul Kurtz, Professor of Philosophy, State University of New York, contains as its first principle a commitment to free inquiry. Free inquiry insists that belief should rest upon the application of critical intelligence to unravel the unknown. It asserts that evidence alone is the test of truth and that a healthy scepticism should prevail concerning beliefs that transcend experience. The early 19th century scientist Wilhelm von Humbolt reformed the Prussian University by insisting on freedom of teaching and learning. His credo, summarized by Steven Muller of the Applied Physics Laboratory, Johns Hopkins University, was that inquiry is an indispensable part of teaching; that truth requires proof rather than faith; that knowledge is advanced by discovery; that to question the wisdom of the past is not only legitimate but indeed necessary.
Humanism accepts only a scientific view of nature. That is to say, the universe really is that which is revealed to us through astronomy and physics; that life and its origins are best explained through chemistry and the biologic sciences.
Science perceives itself not as a sacred vessel that is due unquestioned obedience to its past discoveries and accomplishments, but as an evolving, expanding body of knowledge, self-critical of each minute step of its progress. Not infrequently it is obliged to offer uncertainty and self-professed doubt in place of the absolute certainty and infallibility professed by fundamentalist doctrine. It is astonishing, Albert Einstein once said (in paraphrase), that we understand as much as we do of the universe. He was implying, of course, that we mortals are intellectually limited creatures who are in fact not guided by divine grace but must basically fend for ourselves.
Humanism asserts that all we know and all we shall ever know spring from our inherent intellect coupled with our willingness to experiment with nature and empirically extract the facts that obtain consistently under the same circumstances at all times.
The evolution of life and the descent of man is perhaps the most vehemently contested facet of science by religion in modern times. Within the scientific community synthetic biologic evolution driven principally by Darwin's natural selection and Mendel's genetic variability theses is so freely accepted as to occupy a status of 'first principle'.
Turn to Public Television on almost any evening and you will be regaled by elegant, graphic expositions of the variegated and exquisitely formed products of life filling every possible niche in nature where the ubiquitous and often explicit theme is evolution. This theme is so fundamental, so pervading that any effort to defend it would seem both superfluous and out of place. Specialists in the field no doubt frequently disagree on minor details, but none disagrees on the fact of evolution. However, it is these relatively trivial, esoteric internal squabbles that the fundamentalists attempt to exploit. They contend that since the experts cannot agree, the basic premise must be false.
Humanism is an ethical philosophy. Aside from its genuine concurrence with institutionalized religion with regard to many basic human values and goals, it also subsumes ideals that are quite foreign to traditional religious practice and belief. It contends that on this planet we are intellectually, spiritually quite alone and must rely only upon ourselves to preserve our own species and preserve and protect all other life.
No god will save us either from natural catastrophe or our own destructive impulses. There will be no eschatologic denouement for which we must prepare in either dread or anticipation. All the joy and happiness that we are ever to experience as individuals is here and now. We must be ever tolerant of other ethics, other cultures, other races, other religions, other life styles.
Humanism honors and respects the nobility of human life, the profundity of the human mind. It encourages and defends advances in human knowledge in medicine, science and education which promote the happiness, well-being and intellectual curiosity of mankind. It opposes the efforts of different faiths and political systems that would deny all others these advances where they happen to conflict with their own narrowly interpreted sense of morality. On the other hand, certain religious groups have in the past bitterly resisted anesthetics, blood transfusion, the abolition of child labor and secular education; even now they anathematize sex education, clinical abortion and artificial birth control.
Humanism is totally dedicated to the concept of a free and open democratic society. It does not question the fact that the major faiths in the United States also fully support this idea. However, it is not at all clear that these religious organizations are willing to concede the strict interpretation of the first amendment to the Bill of Rights that its author James Madison intended. Christian leaders appear to have their own interpretation of the principle of separation of church and state and some are now vigorously pursuing a political agenda intended to emasculate this sacred tenet of our heritage. Humanists emphatically endorse the strict interpretation of the first amendment in all of its parts as the best, perhaps the only, means to guarantee the continued freedom of expression, the sanctity of institutionalized religion and the ecclesiastically free democratic process.
Our President clearly fails to grasp the full meaning of the principle of separation of church and state. He avers that this principle guarantees the freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. It means, in fact, both.
Perhaps the clearest distinction that can be advanced to elucidate Secular Humanism is not the expression of what it is, but rather what it is not. Joseph Fletcher, theologian, University of Virginia Medical School, argues that negatives in logic often are as essential as positives in order to provide a full and complete definition of an idea.
Secular Humanism is not, as some would insist, synonymous with atheism, but it counts among its adherents agnostics, nontheists, rationalists and sceptics of all shades. They find insufficient evidence for the notion that some divine purpose pervades the cosmos, that God has revealed Himself (through the miraculous, temporary suspension of natural law) at various times and places to select persons whose mission it was to convey the holy word to the masses.
Although Humanism generally accepts the historicity of Jesus, it rejects the claim of divinity or immortality of any man, including the legion of reincarnated figures of history. It views the promise of immortal life to reward the faithful and eternal damnation to all others as outrageous fraud and a delusion that often deflects men from pursuing a purposeful life here on earth. There is not, nor has there ever been, a shred of evidence that humans possess a soul that exists before birth and survives physical death.
Humanists do not accept the assertion that morality and virtue can exist only within the sphere of organized religion. All of these ideas are inextricably woven into the fabric of the three Western religions, and into some Eastern ones as well. Will Durant, historian, in The Age of Faith, states, "The three religions agreed in rejecting the practicability of a natural nonreligious morality; most men, they believed, can be persuaded to tolerable behavior only by the fear of God. All three based their moral code on identical conceptions: the all-seeing eye and all-recording hand of God, the divine authorship of the moral code, and the ultimate equalization of virtue with happiness by post-mortem punishments and rewards.
Just as communism finds political deviation more dangerous than civic disobedience, the New Religious Right finds Secular Humanism more heinous than crime. The difficulty that Orrin Hatch and his right wing political coalition will have in stamping out Secular Humanism from the public school curriculum is that Secular Humanism spans the spectrum of human knowledge from Anthropology to Zoology.
There is not course of study in the classics, science or the humanities that does not trace its roots in part or in whole to the body of secular thought and wisdom. James Madison, author of the United States Constitution, once said, "We cannot permit the first experiment with our liberty." Unfortunately, we already have.
Howard Garcia is a Boulder physicist.