What is Secular Humanism?

A recent comment on the blog asked an important question: What is Secular Humanism, and why do you adhere to it? One of our CFI-Pittsburgh members, Victor Benard, wrote an excellent essay about Secular Humanism, and I’m reprinting it here with his permission. Enjoy.

What is Secular Humanism? One Humanist’s View

It is a common pastime among secular humanists to argue about the definition and meaning of Secular Humanism. But as every secular humanist has their own definition, nothing is ever agreed upon. That being said, the best short definition of Secular Humanism that I have found is the following:

Secular Humanism is that moral philosophy which teaches that the goal of all political and moral action should be the protection and promotion of individual human welfare.

Some people object to stressing secularism as a necessary part of humanism. I stress the secular nature of humanism because I believe that an absolutely essential feature of humanism is that it focuses solely on human dignity and welfare. If once you introduce “God” into humanism – as many religious humanists try to do – you create a second focal point, which draws your concern away from the individual. Eventually you must choose between your concern for people and your obedience to God. There is only one choice that humanism can make if it is to remain humanism. Since the focus of humanism is, and must be, the individual human being, “God”, as a concept, is at best irrelevant to humanism. Stressing the secular nature of humanism merely acknowledges this fact.

Other people object to the stress on human dignity and welfare. “What about other species? What about the environment?” they ask. But the stress on human welfare merely reflects the fact that we experience our lives as human beings. It is only natural for us to be concerned about our own dignity and welfare. To paraphrase Rabbi Hillel, if we are not for ourselves, who will be? And if we don’t take care of our own welfare, how can we hope to take care of the welfare of the rest of the planet? Ultimately, our human welfare is bound up with the welfare of the rest of our environment. In being concerned for our own welfare, we will also be concerned for the welfare of our entire planet.

Finally, some people object to this definition’s stress on individual human welfare. “What about our human community?” they ask. “Aren’t you just being selfish?” Well, no! This is not a call for unmitigated selfish individualism. Of course, Secular Humanists recognize that belonging to a community of fellow human beings is absolutely essential to our welfare, but “dignity” and “welfare” are experienced only by the individual, never by the group.

The great moral tragedies of the Twentieth Century – the Nazi Holocaust, the Soviet Gulag, and too many others – occurred not because the people involved were necessarily evil, but because they tried to promote the welfare of the group by sacrificing the welfare of the individual. Whether this is done in the name of “Der Volk” or “The Proletariat” or some other idealized group, once you begin sacrificing the dignity and welfare of individuals, you destroy the dignity and welfare of the entire community. It is only by defending the dignity and welfare of the individual that you can defend the dignity and welfare of the group.

Why am I a Secular Humanist? It is because I acknowledge the value of every individual. This value is not arbitrarily imposed from the outside by some higher authority. It is innate – a natural part of every person. It arises out of our sensitivity to the world around us, our empathy and compassion for others, and our capacity for rational and creative thought. Secular Humanism is based on a recognition of this innate value, and seeks to build a philosophic and practical framework around which we can live our lives.

What is Secular Humanism? Postscript: One Humanist’s Experience

I often share my essay “What is Secular Humanism?” with Christian believers. One common reaction to my essay is, “If that’s all there is to Secular Humanism, then I’m a Secular Humanist, too.” I don’t find this too surprising because this definition is based on the ideals of the Enlightenment. It is not surprising that people who love their country, Christians included, would want to embrace the ideals upon which our country was founded. But what I do find surprising is how many Christians will make this statement. I find this surprising because Christians should not be able to agree with this definition.

When Christians claim to accept this definition as a statement of their own beliefs, I have to point out to them that they have not understood what this definition of Secular Humanism is saying. They have failed to grasp the significance of one word – one simple common word – that makes it impossible for them, as Christians, to fully accept this definition as a statement of their beliefs.

The word I am referring to is the word “the” in the phrase “…the goal of all political and moral action…” To fully understand this definition, this phrase should be understood to mean “…the one and only goal of all political and moral action…” Read in this light, it should be clear that no Christian can unreservedly accept this definition. In fact, it is that single word “the”, which defines the true difference between Christianity and Secular Humanism.

To understand why this is, it is only necessary to remember that Christians accept the Bible as the word of God. In it, God reveals His plan for the World and for Humanity. Christians, if the term Christianity is to have any meaning at all, must accept this as a foundational belief of their religion. The problem with this is that the Bible also includes a long list of commandments – many more than a mere ten – for us to obey.

Christians, if they are to be true to their God’s will, must believe that, to be moral, they must follow these commandments. For Christians, therefore the promotion and protection of individual human welfare cannot be the one and only goal of political and moral action. It can only be a goal and, perhaps, not even the most important one. For Christians, obedience to God’s Will must always be another.

But what happens when obedience to God’s will conflicts with the obligation to promote and protect the welfare of the individual? When faced with this conflict, which of these two goals will Christians sacrifice? I doubt that any Christian can really know which goal they will betray until they have actually lived this dilemma. It is here that the Secular Humanist has the advantage over the Christian because this conflict can never arise for the humanist. The humanist has only one goal to seek.

I have watched the eyes of many Christians as they grapple with this conundrum. Some try to evade the implications of these conflicting goals by claiming that God’s Will always promotes and protects the welfare of the individual. But to make this claim, these Christians must deny much of what is in their Bible and a significant portion of Christianity’s history. Others simply refuse to discuss it further. But there are some Christians who seem to understand what that word “the” really implies and – although I may be fooling myself – in those Christians, I believe I have seen a dawning humility and a greater willingness to accept Secular Humanism as a valid moral alternative to religion.

About: I've considered myself a secular humanist since March of 2008, a date preceded on my part by moderate Christian strivings in a fundamentalist environment. I majored in English at a conservative Christian college, and one of my main interests at the time was theology. I enjoy good food, good beer, good conversation, and the skeptical community in Pittsburgh. Read more from this author