A Precis on Humanism
Tibor R.
Machan
In modern times humanism has been
associated with Karl Marx and one of his teachers, Ludwig Feuerbach. The latter was an atheist who believed that
it wasn't God who created man but the other way around. Since, however, this left no one to command
us to do the right thing, an alternative source of morality was proposed by
Feuerbach, namely, humanism.
A humanist argues, not unlike Socrates did,
that ethics or morality rests on an understanding of human nature. What is right and wrong depend on what kind
of beings we are. Because of our free
will, we, unlike other animals, are capable of doing violence to our own
nature. But we ought to choose to follow
it, instead.
As it happens, Marx, who took quite a few
of his ideas from Feuerbach, held a collectivist conception of human
nature. "The human essence,"
he said in his famous essay "On the Jewish Question," "is the
true collectivity of man."
So the desire to find ethical guidance from
an understanding of human nature came to the advocacy of an out and out
collectivist morality. If, as Marx held,
we are specie-beings, so that our flourishing or development in life must be
achieved together, in concert; if individuality is a myth and collectivity the
norm, then humanistic ethics and politics will, accordingly, be collectivist.
The two most emphatic humanists of this
kind were Karl Marx and Auguste Comte.
They both thought that only a secular understanding of human affairs
made sense but they also embraced a conception of human nature that left little
room for the fact of human individuality. As a result most humanists have been
socialists, communists, or something close to these and have found capitalism
anathema to human nature.
This is very unfortunate because although
flourishing among others is a crucial attribute of human life, the essential
individuality of human beings cannot be denied.
Even engaging in arguments testifies to this, let alone the incredible
diversity evident throughout history and the globe, especially involving human creativity.
Indeed, it is arguable that the most genuine humanism is individualism.
The issue of humanism is vita for several
reasons. Although fundamentalist
religions will likely always be part of human life, there is also a growing
awareness that ethics and morality, including our sense of justice, must gain a
footing apart from theology or religion.
The reason is that faith is ineffable, ultimately. It is too personal, too subjective, and thus
it tends toward schism rather than harmony.
Whereas the humanist idea that an understanding of human nature, based
on science and ordinary human reason, holds out promise.
Ethical ideals, if they are part of the
human world, need to be ascertained in such a way that everyone who but
consults his or her reason can grasp them.
Such a replacement of a more religious approach to ethics, now that the
world has become so small, is a welcome idea.
However, if humanism remains wedded to
collectivism, it will turn out to be a false and dangerous alternative to faith based ethics.
