In the first issue of Free Inquiry, a declaration for secular humanism appeared alongside an essay by Paul Beattie, a Unitarian minister and president of the Fellowship of Religious Humanists. Beattie was also among the declaration’s signers. That combination helps explain the relationship between secular humanism and religion. The declaration defended ethics grounded in human life and public institutions open to people of different convictions. Its signers could share those commitments while using the word religion in different ways.
What secular humanism asks people to do
Secular humanism is a way of thinking about how to live that draws on human experience, reason and concern for the effects of our actions. Humanists International’s 2022 declaration connects ethics with the ability of living beings to suffer and flourish. It assigns different roles to evidence and values. Inquiry can help us discover what a decision is likely to do, while values guide our judgment about which effects matter and which goals deserve pursuit. For example, evidence can help estimate who would gain or lose from a public decision. Respect for people’s dignity guides how those gains and losses should be weighed. Read the Declaration of Modern Humanism.
Why the 1933 manifesto used religious language
The first Humanist Manifesto, published in 1933 in the United States, used the term religious humanism. Its signers included the philosopher John Dewey and several Unitarian ministers. It treated art, work, friendship and cooperation for social well-being as activities capable of carrying religious significance. It placed the development of human capacities in this life at the center of its program and proposed that religious institutions be reshaped accordingly. The document shows one way that people could describe a naturalistic outlook in religious terms. The American Humanist Association now presents it as a historical statement and identifies the 2003 manifesto as its successor. Read the 1933 manifesto and its list of signers.
Amsterdam and the organization of ethical humanism
In 1952 the first World Humanist Congress met in Amsterdam. Its participants established the International Humanist and Ethical Union, now Humanists International. The organization’s history records discussion about whether the name should emphasize the word ethical or humanist. The final name included both. The declaration adopted there presented democratic participation, human dignity and freedom as part of an ethical outlook. It also warned that scientific knowledge could be used in ways that undermined freedom. The congress agreed on principles even as its participants brought different histories and meanings to the terms they used. Read the organization’s account of the founding congress. Read the original Amsterdam Declaration.
What the 1980 declaration meant by secular
A Secular Humanist Declaration, published in the winter 1980–81 issue of Free Inquiry, put free inquiry first. It linked freedom of conscience to room for dissent and argued for the separation of church and state. In its account, the power of public institutions should leave room for people to hold and express different convictions. The declaration names compulsory religious oaths in public institutions as an example. Someone should be able to take part in public life without professing a belief they do not hold. The same principle applies to a state that imposes an official secular ideology and restricts dissent. Read the sections on inquiry and church–state separation.
Beattie’s essay in that issue used religion for a broad orientation to life. It also identified differences among humanists over the value of congregational institutions and the study of religious traditions. His signature on the declaration shows that agreement about the freedom to inquire and believe could coexist with disagreement about how to name and organize an ethical way of life. Read the declaration’s signatories and Beattie’s essay in the original issue.
Conclusion
Secular humanism connects freedom of inquiry with responsibility for the conditions in which people live. The manifestos and congress records show how people have expressed that responsibility in different settings. Some worked through congregations, others through secular advocacy or international associations. The differences become easier to understand when we separate the grounds people give for their ethics, the institutions they choose to join and the freedoms they want public institutions to protect.
Published by Ralf. About our editorial process.
