The Horrors of Humanism

Frederick R Smith has moved to Frederick R. Smith Speaks (substack.com)

The book “The Best of Humanism” by Roger E. Greely (Prometheus Books 1988), Julian Huxley (1887-1975) proclaims: “I use the word ‘Humanist’ to mean someone who believes that man is just as much a natural phenomenon as an animal or a plant, that his body, his mind, and his soul were not supernaturally created but are all products of evolution, and that he is not under control or guidance of any supernatural Being or beings, but has to rely on himself and his on powers.”

Huxley based his entire life work on man-based theories. He was a strict Darwinist and led the United Nations Education Scientific Counsel (UNESCO) from 1946 to 1948. What strikes me the most about the above quote - the theory that man’s soul is an evolutionary product devoid of the supernatural. If this was true, one can conclude that Humanism is a form of religion. That aside, it is incomprehensive that there is even a notion that evolution created a soul. Does it evolve in each person? Or are all persons born with a soul because humankind has “evolved?” It seems “natural” for such an articulate person to believe in a soul that evolved. Nevertheless, why do such thinkers as Huxley the consummate Humanist disdain the thought of a supernatural loving God? Stay tuned sports fans.

Humanism is the view that “mankind is the measure of all things.” Humanism will always fail because the best that man can do is to change external things. The ultimate sample of total humanism is the French Revolution where a society destroyed itself from within. It is important to keep in mind that the American Revolution and French Revolution had opposing struggles. The American Revolution; the covenant between Man and God. The French Revolution; a godless society.

While it is possible for a man to influence such things as the environment, it is not possible for him to change the heart of humankind. Humankind will always remain the same. Even if one subscribes to the evolving human race, I further submit that humans have and will wish the same basic things. Regardless of the location on earth, or the time in history, we all have basic needs and desires. While we may have technology at our disposal, humanity is still prone to selfishness and greed.

The overarching concern is the Humanist’s penchant for believing in the perfection of humankind. This, despite such despicable events as the holocaust or the deeds of murderous communist regimes. From a theological perspective, if God exists, then why do these bad (evil) things occur. The answer is the fact that we have free will which is a gift from the Almighty, otherwise, we would be non-thinking robotic creatures. If we leave God out of the picture, as desired by the Humanists, this is what we reap - humankind with no reason to fear bad deeds.

The Humanist Manifesto I (1933) and the Manifesto II (1973) have the basic tenants of the American Humanist Association. These are the workbooks for those who have a worldview that considers people as good with no need for Divine guidance. If it is possible for Humanists to instill good wholesome values, it would be acceptable. It does not. This same worldview celebrates such things as moral relativism and values clarification. This fuzzy logic where the division between good and bad evaporates. There is no such thing as good and evil.

The typical reaction to a quest for morals, values, and principles brings up the moral relativism argument. For example, “who’s morals and there are questions about the Ten Commandments. One translation uses the word murder while another translation used the word kill.”

Why such a penchant for moral relativism and values clarification? Because, if presenting any of the tenants of the Ten Commandments, even in a secular manner, the people with this worldview are shocked. Remember, God supplied us the Ten Commandments (or by fiction in the mind of the humanists). In their mind then how can this “unscientific” thing (Ten Commandments) form a base for moral teachings? So that is why it should be unacceptable to preach humanism to children in schools. It is puzzling humanistic acceptance of students decorating classrooms for Halloween. This features ghosts, spirits, and goblins.

If spontaneous generation occurs, it would be the same odds as an explosion in a print shop causing a dictionary of the English language to appear. With that in mind, below is the main creed of the Humanist Manifesto I:

1. Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created.
2. Humanism believes that man is a part of nature and that he has emerged as a result of a continuous process.
3. Holding an organic view of life, humanists find that the traditional dualism of mind and body must be rejected.
4. Humanism recognizes that man’s religious culture and civilization, as clearly depicted by anthropology and history, are the product of a gradual development due to his interaction with his natural environment and with his social heritage. The individual born into a particular culture is largely molded by that culture.
5. Humanism asserts that the nature of the universe depicted by modern science makes unacceptable any supernatural or cosmic guarantees of human values. Obviously humanism does not deny the possibility of realities as yet undiscovered, but it does insist that the way to determine the existence and value of any and all realities is by means of intelligent inquiry and by the assessment of their relations to human needs. Religion must formulate its hopes and plans in the light of the scientific spirit and method.
6. We are convinced that the time has passed for theism, deism, modernism, and the several varieties of “new thought.”
7. Religion consists of those actions, purposes, and experiences which are humanly significant. Nothing human is alien to the religious. It includes labor, art, science, philosophy, love, friendship, recreation — all that is in its degree expressive of intelligently satisfying human living. The distinction between the sacred and the secular can no longer be maintained.
8. Religious Humanism considers the complete realization of human personality to be the end of man’s life and seeks its development and fulfillment in the here and now. This is the explanation of the humanist’s social passion.
9. In the place of the old attitudes involved in worship and prayer the humanist finds his religious emotions expressed in a heightened sense of personal life and in a cooperative effort to promote social well-being.
10. It follows that there will be no uniquely religious emotions and attitudes of the kind hitherto associated with belief in the supernatural.
11. Man will learn to face the crises of life in terms of his knowledge of their naturalness and probability. Reasonable and manly attitudes will be fostered by education and supported by custom. We assume that humanism will take the path of social and mental hygiene and discourage sentimental and unreal hopes and wishful thinking.
12. Believing that religion must work increasingly for joy in living, religious humanists aim to foster the creative in man and to encourage achievements that add to the satisfactions of life.
13. Religious humanism maintains that all associations and institutions exist for the fulfillment of human life. The intelligent evaluation, transformation, control, and direction of such associations and institutions with a view to the enhancement of human life is the purpose and program of humanism. Certainly religious institutions, their ritualistic forms, ecclesiastical methods, and communal activities must be reconstituted as rapidly as experience allows, in order to function effectively in the modern world.
14. The humanists are firmly convinced that existing acquisitive and profit-motivated society has shown itself to be inadequate and that a radical change in methods, controls, and motives must be instituted. A socialized and cooperative economic order must be established to the end that the equitable distribution of the means of life be possible. The goal of humanism is a free and universal society in which people voluntarily and intelligently cooperate for the common good. Humanists demand a shared life in a shared world.
15. We assert that humanism will: (a) affirm life rather than deny it; (b) seek to elicit the possibilities of life, not flee from them; and (c) endeavor to establish the conditions of a satisfactory life for all, not merely for the few. By this positive morale and intention humanism will be guided, and from this perspective and alignment the techniques and efforts of humanism will flow.

Looking at the American Humanist Association web page, note the lack of writing or reference to morals, values, and principles (as we know from classical liberalism). The liberalism of today is quite different from the classical liberalism of yesteryear. That real liberalism recognized liberty but with self-imposed brakes. These “brakes,” drawn from the Ten Commandants supplied the basis for society to recognize injurious behavior. With the removal of the factual basis of classical liberalism, Divine Providence, society will collapse. While the Humanists may not believe that they are working to collapse society, this is exactly what the tenants of their manifesto carry out.

This author does not believe that all those who espouse the humanist creed are evil. In fact, most are well-intentioned and want the advancement of the human race. Our humanist friends are people and we must treat them well as we would like the same. We need to confront the depravity in the foreground and the evil in the background.

In closing, this author would like to suggest that we all review the above 15 Humanist Manifesto points. Its background of religious contempt will jump out and grab us. It is curious to see the references to “religious humanism.” Some tolerance on the part of the humanists about theistic religion would be nice.

As my favorite comedian would say at the end of his wonderful show, “And May God bless!”