From Tribalism to Humanism

#152 by kaalchakra

... uncompromisingly, a sociopolitical system of the humans, created entirely by the humans, for the sole benefits and pleasure of the humans....Nor does it have to do with one individual here or twenty individuals there behaving as humanists.

That pretty much sums it up. Well said.

#153 by Saroya

I can`t get your line of reasoning here ... care to explain?

Hey Zeemax

Hippies helped bring an end to the Vietnam war and Humanists are dreamers.

How profound. I wonder what the members of the 66th North Vietnamese Regiment would think about that comment?

The publicity brought about by the hippie culture was certainly most useful in political circles; they therefore did make an enormous impact, I agree; we appear to continue to pay the price for their activities to this day.

Were it not for dreamers Zeemax, we`d still be riding horses from one county to another!

Drohail, I`ve already been to your website and I thank you for the offer. I`ll be in touch.

Thanks, Saroya, for adding to Dr. Sohail`s truly inspirational vision. Particularly since you are also familiar with what great men and women of the past have said of humanism. My personal conceptualization of humanism is only partly related to the categories of ideas described in your #148 - in the congruence of objectives. In most other ways, it differs significantly. So apologies for the confusion.

The humanism of my interest (dreams, really) is, uncompromisingly, a sociopolitical system of the humans, created entirely by the humans, for the sole benefits and pleasure of the humans.

Nothing more, nothing less. So it cannot be just a mindset, a life-style, an ideology, a philosophy, or a movement, although a humanistic sociopolitical system would actively encompass, encourage, and privilege them. Nor does it have to do with one individual here or twenty individuals there behaving as humanists. To be of any real use, or be counted as signficant player of the competitive game, humanism must - at the very least - imagine (the possibility of) viable, functioning, durable societies.

Saroya, do any existing bodies of ideas resonate with such concerns? A thumbnail sketch of anything that you might know would be most appreciated. Thanks.

#149 by Saroya

I dunno if the hippies were rational or not, but they sure did change public opinion and help bring an end to the vietnam war merely through that Peace symbol of theirs ...

As for being humanists? Not according to your defintions. They transcended all this sickly sweet Reader`s Digest kind of stuff you guys dream about.

Re: # 148
Dear Saroya...I thoroughly enjoy your letters. I will try to get the book you suggested. I would like to send you two of my books
From Islam to Secular Humanism...published in 2001
and
Freedom of Religion...Freedom from Religion (hoping to be out next week...hot from the press)
if you wish to read please send me your postal address and I will send you as gifts.
where do you live?
you can see my other writings on
www.drsohail.com
sincerely sohail

Re: # 124

Have often wondered what people`s thoughts were on the hippies.

Could the hippies of the 60`s be considered rational in their behaviour?

They preached `human rights` and in so doing, could they be considered humanists?

Hello dear friends

I have been away for a couple of days, hence the delay in responding, however I did read your post Kaalchakra before I left and I did think about your questions while I was away.

The delight I felt at coming back to my computer and finding so much activity and interaction since I left! It`s yet another example of the world turning irrespective of where we are and what we do!!!

So, how do I answer your first question, Kaalchakra? IS there an official view of `humanism`? I too wonder.

Here is another possibility though:- http://www.humanism.org/project.html

Quote: The humanist movement is an international organization formed by people of different ages, origins, culture and religion, united by the project to build a truly human society. A society in which the human being, with his needs and aspirations, is the central value. A society in which human rights are completely realized: the right to health, instruction, freedom, spirituality, search for the meaning of life, and an existence with dignity. Unquote

Could this be considered an `official view` of Humanism?

`People UNITED by a (project?) to BUILD a truly `human society` in which the human being is the central value with the `RIGHT` to be healthy, be free, be spiritual etc etc. etc.

And yet another possibility:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism

Quote: Humanism, as a philosophical term, is a broad category of active ethical philosophies that affirm the dignity and worth of all people, based on the ability to determine right and wrong by appeal to universal human qualities—particularly rationalism. Humanism is a component of a variety of more specific philosophical systems, and is also incorporated into some religious schools of thought. Humanism entails a commitment to the search for truth and morality through human means in support of human interests. In focusing on the capacity for self-determination, humanism rejects the validity of transcendental justifications, such as a dependence on faith, the supernatural, or divinely revealed texts. Humanists endorse universal morality based on the commonality of human nature, suggesting that solutions to human social and cultural problems cannot be parochial. Unquote

Could this be considered an `official view`?

It`s worthwhile having a look at the sections of `humanism` incorporated at the aforementioned set of principles of that view of humanism - very interesting indeed, it speaks about `Secular Humanism`, `Religious Humanism` and just for good measure, there`s an `Educational Humanism` as well!

There are probably as many views on humanism as there are stars in the sky or people on earth prepared to think on the subject.

From the early 14th century man has pondered and theorized on the word `humanism` and will, hopefully, continue to do so for many centuries to come.

I, for one, would not consider the definition in my earlier post `an official view`, nor would I want to as, in doing so, it would immediately narrow my perspective to any future explanation which could possibly be better. Having said that, the earlier definition is perhaps closest to my philosophy as it can be, AT THIS POINT IN TIME.

Now to your second question, which had me thinking quite a lot!!

Firstly; to man, anything and everything is possible.

Assuming humanism to be, ESSENTIALLY, a rationalist movement that believes that man CAN be ethical and find self-fulfillment, WITHOUT recourse to supernaturalism; it is possible for a society to put it into practice.

Drsohail, see if you can find a copy of `Humanism - What`s in a Word` by Nicolas Walter - I think you`d enjoy it very much.

Re: # 145

ustaad-e-mukarram....islaah ka shukrya....kabhi waqt ho to meri website www.drsohail.com

par meri shairi dekhiay aur apna qeemati mashwara deejiay...sohail

Re: # 144
dear kaalchakra....i have no idea how saroya will answer your question. i am a poet, a

humanist and a psychotherapist. i believe in education and evolution. i do not see myself as

revolutionary who has to convert others and change the world. i feel that if i try to live my

life according to my philosophy and help all those human beings that i come in touch with

everyday whether through education or in therapy, then my conscience is clear that i am

playing my role in human evolution. i like to have a dialogue the way i am having with you

and learn from you. that is all i am after. for me humanism is an attitude the way sincerity,

honesty and integrity and rational thinking is. if humanists tried to convert all religious

people by force and coercion, then i will dissociate from that process. for me respecting

others even when i disagree with them is the fundamental aspect of humanism. if

humanists have a responsible position in life then i hope they try to serve rather than rule

humanity. i think life is simple. some of us make it very complicated. my dear friend

zeemax called me `naive` on another discussion. i smiled when i read that. i rather

be `naive` and have trust and faith in humanity rather than believe all human beings are

animals and cruel and evil. i rather connect with the kind and gentle and bright side of

people rather that their cruel and dark sides. i am aware we as human beings have both

sides to our personality at a personal and collective level. at the time of war some join the

red cross and save people while others steal and loot. i hope i join the red cross and serve

others.

dear kaalchakra....of all the books that i read to understand the human evolution and

evolution of the qualities that transformed animals into humans two books i liked the most

and i suggest them to my friends. they are

DESCENT OF MAN BY CHARLES DARWIN

COSMIC CONSCIOUSNESS BY RICHARD BUCKE

these books capture the journey of becoming fully human and it has taken a long long

time to get half way...and we have a to go a long way to create those communities that you

are wishing for. i am a patient man. now that i have honestly shared my position please

feel free to share your philosophy and ideology and how that can be put into practice....all

the best....sohail

Re: # 142

drsohail

Excuse me dear. Mera aapko mukhlisana mashwarah he kih aap shaairi ko to muaaf hi rakhen to behtar he.

Yih aapka shehr:

``sadion ki zangjeerain khainchain peechay ki jaanib

phir bhi aagay barthay rehna kitna mushkil hay``

to mujhe kuchh, narm lafzon mein, illogical sa laga. Mera khayaal he kih doosri line mein jo `Kitna mushkil hay` ki jagah `chahie ham ko` rakh den to `shehr` kam az kam logical to ho jaega.

regards

The questions and comments are merely to strengthen your case, Sir, so we can all follow your lead - and that`s meant with all sincerity.

The next step on which we need the guidance of thinkers like you and Saroya is to figure out how we are going to convince people who we might call, for lack of another term - Goddies - believers holding that all worthwhile virtue comes from and is justified in the ultimate happiness of their God alone.

And in understanding whether political power, in any way, matters. Can humanism still blossom healthy in hearts of the masses when political and coercive power (and hence the ability to set limits on everything from school syllabii to editorials in daily newspapers) lies in the hands of confirmed Goddies?

Re: # 140

dear kaalchakra....i thought saroya would share his wisdom in responding to your question.

in my humble opinion philosophy of humanisn is put in practice when

...a parent does not tell his children that they are sinning and would burn in hell

...a teacher teaches the students all religious and secular traditions as part of history and

not as faith

...a leader of the community does not hate another leader because he is of a different sect

or religion

...human beings welcome and embrace other human beings because of their character and

service to community

...people try to solve personal and social problems with rationality and wisdom learning

from modern science and psychology and sociology rather than relying on hundreds of

years old scriptures.

....communities look toward the future rather than being preoccupied with the past

thank you for your thought provoking comments and questions. sincerely sohail

Re: # 141
dear dana-e-raaz...thank you for your kind words. it is hard for all of us to undo and

unlearn the conditioning of hundreds of years but not impossible. one of my sheyrs

sadion ki zangjeerain khainchain peechay ki jaanib

phir bhi aagay barthay rehna kitna mushkil hay

all the best...sohail

Dear Dr. Sohail,
Absolutely beautiful, as usual. Why can`t we have some more people to pen such thoughts.

Choicest of my wishes

Najeeb Kazmi

saroya

Is that the ``official`` view of humanism? How is it supposed to be put in practice by any society?