By Douglas Anele

Moreover s/he “will accept the wonders of nature, the depths of human love,the rapture of poetry as more than sufficient for the loss of miracles.” The author contrasts humanism with ideology, that is, “a collection of beliefs and values held for a specific group of people and a particular programme of action” (p. 19).

Unlike ideologues, humanists are wary of all-embracing solutions or teachings, preferring to anchor each question and idea on the practical, the particular, and the personal.Pragmatism and logical positivism, two prominent schools of thought in philosophy, are important for humanism.

Pragmatism shares with humanism scepticism towards our knowledge of the world and the decision to take what is valuable for our actions in the world as the “working truth.” The noted positivist, A. J. Ayer, was active in the humanist movement. But although humanists tend to be interested in philosophy, expert knowledge of philosophy is not really necessary for one to be a humanist.

Yet, “since Plato and Aristotle philosophers have dealt with the broad questions of what is the world and what meaning there is in a human life in a way which humanists find of great interest. There is no humanist Bible or Koran, no creed or dogma, but within the philosophical tradition humanists may find stimulus for their questing and questioning approach to life” (p. 20).

Chapter four focuses on humanism and morality. It begins with the question: “Can you be good without god?” The author argues that unlike nihilists and extreme libertarians, humanists acknowledge the need for a moral sense, a social conscience and the necessity to consider others.

The author rejects the notion that morality requires belief in a supernatural deity, and points out “that the social nature of humans creates the need for morality, not from a god but from the nature of human self-responsibility and social interrelations.”

Humanists believe that, in spite of differences in the formulation of moral ideals in different epochs and cultures, there is a broad consensus across religious and non-religious points of view as to what are sometimes called the “moral decencies” of life which form part of the outlook of a moral person.

These include honesty, integrity, kindness, love of one’s family and friends, generosity, and forgiveness. But of all moral prescriptions, the author submits that the Golden Rule principle which stipulates that “we should do unto others as we would want them to do to us” is preeminent.

Humanists can comfortably accommodate these moral ideals without reference to any deity. And although they do not have a written set of moral rules, like the Ten Commandments of the OldTestament and do not believe in absolute good and evil, humanists are quite conscious of the ethical dimension of life.

On the issue of humanism and religion, the central topic of chapter five, Herrick affirms that humanists believe in the freedom of and freedom from religion. For a humanist there should be an end to the power, control and privilege accorded to religion.

Humanists respect the right to religious worship, but they abhor all forms of intolerance associated with religion. Herrick observes that there is a marked decline in religion in the west as a result of secularisation which beganabout 150 years agodue mainly to the expansion of scientific knowledge and the technological innovations connected with it. The level of decline in church attendance differs from one country to another; however in Muslim countries religious observance is high – and increasing as well (p. 31).

From the humanistic perspective, religion plays a functional in the society. It is a social construct, a human creation and, therefore, requires no divine explanation. But apart from religion there are other ways of achieving social cohesion and finding meaning in life. In chapter six Herrick explores the nexus between humanism and politics.

In his view, politics is necessary because as social animals human beings live in communities and must participate in the life of the community. But politics is oftentimes associated with sleaze and corruption. Moreover political power has been abused, especially by dictators. Thus, it is necessary to create checks and balances and to promote the humanist notion that participation in politics is to serve the common good.

Humanists believe in a society that is open, just democratic and participatory, and loathe rulership by religious leaders or despots. Additionally, they believe deeply in the importance of the right to speak, write and broadcast freely with appropriate safeguards for national security. Humanists do not believe in any Utopia, but they accept that it is valuable to have a blueprint of ideals and plans for the future (p. 41).

The best that can be hoped for through politics is amelioration of the worst aspects of the human condition. Effort to contribute to the community as a whole is essential to the humanist vision, although potential conflicts between different groups in society and the human lust for power should never be underestimated. Herrick devotes chapter eight of his book to humanism and science. He cheerfully proclaims that the scientific process and the scientific worldview are essential to humanism.

Of course, not all scientists are humanists, but all humanists will consider science to be important. The chapter discusses briefly aspects of scientific method, and lays emphasis on theorising and experimentation. Self-consistency, linkage with other branches of science, prediction of novel facts and simplicity are important features of science which differentiate it from other forms of thought.

For the humanist, two key scientific theories are the theory of evolution and the big bang theory of cosmic origin. Herrick frankly admits that both theories do not definitively disprove the existence of god, but they prompt humanists to reject deistic explanations of how the universe came into being. He deplores pseudo-science and anti-science both of which he attributed to the difficulty“in accepting the idea of a random universe and a universe without purpose” (p. 49).

In spite of the apparent universe-without-purpose revealed by science, the author concludes the chapter with the following proposition: “… anyone able to surf through complex mathematics, study the natural world, or contemplate the stars above will surely possess a stimulating sense of wonder in the face of the universe” (p. 49).