View source for Secular humanism

{{Short description|Life stance that embraces human reason, secular ethics, and philosophical naturalism}}
{{for-multi|other uses of humanism|Humanism (disambiguation)}}
{{Use Oxford spelling|date=October 2019}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=December 2020}}
{{Atheism and Irreligion Sidebar|expanded=irreligion}}
{{Humanism}}
{{Liberalism sidebar|expanded=liberalism}}

'''Secular humanism''' is a [[philosophy]], belief system, or [[life stance]] that embraces human [[reason]], [[logic]], [[secular ethics]], and [[philosophical naturalism]], while specifically rejecting religious [[dogma]], [[supernaturalism]], and [[superstition]] as the basis of [[morality]] and decision-making.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/cherry_18_1.01.html|title=10 Myths About Secular Humanism|author=Council for Secular Humanism|access-date=12 June 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150512153115/http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/cherry_18_1.01.html|archive-date=12 May 2015|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref name="americanhumanist">{{cite web|title=What Is Humanism?|author=Edwords, Fred|url=http://www.americanhumanist.org/who_we_are/about_humanism/What_is_Humanism|year=1989|publisher=American Humanist Association|access-date=19 August 2009|quote=Secular Humanism is an outgrowth of eighteenth century enlightenment rationalism and nineteenth century freethought... A decidedly anti-theistic version of secular humanism, however, is developed by Adolf Grünbaum, 'In Defense of Secular Humanism' (1995), in his ''Collected Works'' (edited by Thomas Kupka), vol. I, New York: Oxford University Press 2013, ch. 6 (pp. 115–48)|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100130233229/http://www.americanhumanist.org/who_we_are/about_humanism/What_is_Humanism|archive-date=30 January 2010}}</ref><ref name="oxford-secularhumanism">{{Cite book|title=Compact Oxford English dictionary|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=2007|quote=humanism ''n.'' 1 a rationalistic system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters.|publication-date = 2007}}</ref><ref name="humaniststudies">{{cite web|title=Definitions of humanism (subsection)|publisher=Institute for Humanist Studies|url=http://humaniststudies.org/humphil.html|access-date=16 January 2007|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070118050402/http://humaniststudies.org/humphil.html|archive-date=18 January 2007}}</ref> 

Secular humanism posits that human beings are capable of being ethical and moral [[Irreligion|without religion]] or belief in a [[deity]]. It does not, however, assume that humans are either inherently [[Good and evil|good or evil]], nor does it present humans as being superior to nature. Rather, the humanist life stance emphasizes the unique responsibility facing humanity and the ethical consequences of human decisions. Fundamental to the concept of secular humanism is the strongly held viewpoint that ideology—be it religious or political—must be thoroughly examined by each individual and not simply accepted or rejected on faith. Along with this, an essential part of secular humanism is a continually adapting search for truth, primarily through [[science]] and [[philosophy]]. Many secular humanists derive their moral codes from a philosophy of [[utilitarianism]], [[ethical naturalism]], or [[evolutionary ethics]], and some advocate a [[science of morality]].

[[Humanists International]], founded by [[Julian Huxley]] and [[Jaap van Praag]], is the world union of more than one hundred humanist, [[rationalist]], irreligious, [[Atheism|atheist]], [[Brights movement|Bright]], [[Secularity|secular]], [[Ethical movement|Ethical Culture]], and [[freethought]] organizations in more than 40 countries. The "[[Happy Human]]" is recognized as the official symbol of humanism internationally, used by secular humanist organizations in every part of the world. 

The term itself is not uncontested. "Secular humanism" is not a universally used phrase, and is most prevalent in the United States; it's considered an [[American English|Americanism]], as most European, African, and Asian countries use "[[humanism]]" without an adjective to refer to the same concept.<ref name=Wiley>{{cite web|url=https://newhumanist.org.uk/articles/5223/the-myth-of-humanisms-christian-roots|title=The myth of humanism's Christian roots|work=New Humanist|publisher=Rationalist Association|date=23 August 2017|accessdate=7 October 2025|last=Copson|first=Andrew}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Copson  |first=Andrew  |title=The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Humanism  | chapter=What is humanism? |editor-last=Copson  |editor-first=Andrew  |editor2-last=Grayling  |editor2-first=A. C.  |publisher=John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. |date=2015  |pages=3–15  |url=https://understandinghumanism.org.uk/res_otherresource/handbook-of-humanism/  |access-date=7 October 2025}}</ref> Some international use of qualifying adjectives, including "secular" and "[[religious humanism|religious]]", has also been based on "false etymological and historical assumptions" about humanism.<ref name=Wiley/> Humanist commentators have remarked that "'hyphenated humanism' easily becomes more about the adjective than its referent".

==Terminology==
The meaning of the phrase ''secular humanism'' has evolved over time. The phrase has been used since at least the 1930s by [[Anglican priest]]s,<ref>See "Unemployed at service: church and the world", ''[[The Guardian]]'', 25 May 1935, p. 18: citing the comments of Rev. W.G. Peck, rector of St. John the Baptist, Hulme Manchester, concerning "The modern age of secular humanism". [http://archive.guardian.co.uk Guardian and Observer Digital Archive]</ref> and in 1943 the [[Archbishop of Canterbury]], [[William Temple (archbishop)|William Temple]], was reported as warning that the "Christian tradition... was in danger of being undermined by a 'Secular Humanism' which hoped to retain Christian values without Christian faith."<ref>"Free Church ministers in Anglican pulpits. Dr Temple's call: the South India Scheme." ''The Guardian'', 26 May 1943, p. 6 [http://archive.guardian.co.uk Guardian and Observer Digital Archive]</ref> During the 1960s and 1970s the term was embraced by some humanists who considered themselves anti-religious,<ref>See Mouat, Kit (1972) ''An Introduction to Secular Humanism''. Haywards Heath: Charles Clarke Ltd. Also, ''[[The Freethinker (journal)|The Freethinker]]'' began to use the phrase "secular humanist monthly" on its front page masthead.</ref> as well as those who, although not critical of religion in its various guises, preferred a non-religious approach.<ref name="what"/> The release in 1980 of ''[[A Secular Humanist Declaration]]'' by the newly formed Council for Democratic and Secular Humanism (CODESH, later the [[Council for Secular Humanism]], which with [[Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal|CSICOP]] in 1991 jointly formed the [[Center for Inquiry]] and in 2015 both ceased separate operations, becoming CFI programs) gave secular humanism an organisational identity within the United States; but no overall organisation involved currently uses a name featuring "secular humanism".

However, many adherents of the approach reject the use of the word ''secular'' as obfuscating and confusing, and consider that the term ''secular humanism'' has been "demonized by the religious right... All too often secular humanism is reduced to a sterile outlook consisting of little more than [[secularism]] slightly broadened by academic ethics. This kind of 'hyphenated humanism' easily becomes more about the adjective than its referent".<ref name=Doerr>[http://www.thehumanist.org/humanist/articles/DoerrND02.htm Humanism Unmodified] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080505045347/http://www.thehumanist.org/humanist/articles/DoerrND02.htm |date=5 May 2008 }} By Edd Doerr. Published in the ''Humanist'' (November/December 2002)</ref> Adherents of this view, including [[Humanists International]] and the [[American Humanist Association]], consider that the unmodified but capitalized word Humanism should be used. The endorsement by the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU) of the capitalization of the word ''Humanism'', and the dropping of any adjective such as ''secular'', is quite recent. The American Humanist Association began to adopt this view in 1973, and the IHEU formally endorsed the position in 1989. In 2002 the IHEU General Assembly unanimously adopted the [[Amsterdam Declaration]], which represents the official defining statement of World Humanism for Humanists. This declaration makes exclusive use of capitalized ''Humanist'' and ''Humanism'', which is consistent with IHEU's general practice and recommendations for promoting a unified Humanist identity.<ref name=Webbs>"Capitalization <nowiki>[</nowiki>of ''Humanism''<nowiki>]</nowiki> is not mandatory... It is recommended usage and the normal usage within IHEU"&mdash;Jeremy Webbs, IHEU webmaster, from a response to a Wikipedia editor inquiry, dated 2 March 2006.</ref>{{Unreliable source?|sure=yes|reason=Unpublished WP:SOURCE.|date=January 2023}} To further promote Humanist identity, these words are also free of any adjectives, as recommended by prominent members of IHEU.<ref name=Blackham>''[http://iheu.org/humanism/humanism-is-eight-letters-no-more/ Humanism is Eight Letters, No More]''&mdash;endorsed by [[Harold John Blackham]], [[Levi Fragell]], [[Corliss Lamont]], [[Harry Stopes-Roe]] and Rob Tielman.</ref> Such usage is not universal among IHEU member organizations, though most of them do observe these conventions.

==History==


The historical [[Humanism#History|use of the term humanism]] (reflected in some current academic usage), is related to the writings of [[Pre-Socratic philosophy|pre-Socratic philosophers]]. These writings were lost to European societies until Renaissance scholars rediscovered them through Muslim sources and translated them from Arabic into European languages.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/arab-y67s11.html |title=Islamic political philosophy: Al-Farabi, Avicenna, Averroes |publisher=Fordham.edu |access-date=13 November 2011}}</ref> Thus the term humanist can mean a humanities scholar, as well as refer to [[The Enlightenment]]/ [[Renaissance]] intellectuals, and those who have agreement with the pre-Socratics, as distinct from the later secular humanists.

As a term, ''humanism'' did not enter into the English language until the 19th century and indicates the difference between the Renaissance humanist scholars on the one hand and the secular humanist movements of the 20th and 21st centuries on the other, which are explicitly non-religious or atheistic.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Fowler |first1=Jeaneane |title=Humanism - Beliefs and Practices |date=1999 |publisher=Sussex Academic Press |pages=19-20}}</ref>  

===Secularism===

[[File:Holyoake2.JPG|thumb|upright|George Holyoake coined the term "secularism" and led the secular movement in Britain from the mid-19th century.]]
In 1851 [[George Holyoake]] coined the term "secularism"<ref>Holyoake, G. J. (1896). ''The Origin and Nature of Secularism.'' London: Watts & Co., p. 50.</ref> to describe "a form of opinion which concerns itself only with questions, the issues of which can be tested by the experience of this life".<ref name="Secularism 101">{{cite web 
|url= http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/religion/blrel_sec_def.htm 
|title= Secularism 101: Defining Secularism: Origins with George Jacob Holyoake 
|publisher= Atheism.about.com 
|date= 2 September 2011 
|access-date= 13 November 2011 
|archive-date= 22 September 2006 
|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20060922083203/http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/religion/blrel_sec_def.htm 
|url-status= dead 
}}</ref>

The modern secular movement coalesced around Holyoake, [[Charles Bradlaugh]] and their intellectual circle. The first secular society, the [[Leicester Secular Society]], dates from 1851. Similar regional societies came together to form the [[National Secular Society]] in 1866.

===Positivism and the Church of Humanity===
Holyoake's [[secularism]] was strongly influenced by [[Auguste Comte]], the founder of [[positivism]] and of modern [[sociology]]. Comte believed human history would progress in a "[[law of three stages]]" from a [[theological]] phase, to the "[[Metaphysics|metaphysical]]", toward a fully rational "positivist" society. In later life, Comte had attempted to introduce a "[[religion of humanity]]" in light of growing anti-religious sentiment and social malaise in [[French Revolution|revolutionary France]]. This religion would necessarily fulfil the [[structural functionalism|functional]], cohesive role that supernatural religion once served.

Although Comte's religious movement was unsuccessful in France, the positivist philosophy of science itself played a major role in the proliferation of secular organizations in the 19th century in England. [[Richard Congreve]] visited Paris shortly after the [[French Revolution of 1848]] where he met [[Auguste Comte]] and was heavily influenced by his positivist system. He founded the London Positivist Society in 1867, which attracted [[Frederic Harrison]], [[Edward Spencer Beesly]], [[Vernon Lushington]], and [[James Cotter Morison]] amongst others.

In 1878, the Society established the [[Church of Humanity]] under Congreve's direction. There they introduced sacraments of the Religion of Humanity and published a co-operative translation of Comte's Positive Polity. When Congreve repudiated their Paris co-religionists in 1878, Beesly, Harrison, Bridges, and others formed their own positivist society, with Beesly as president, and opened a rival centre, Newton Hall, in a courtyard off Fleet Street.

The New York City version of the church was established by English immigrant [[Henry Edger]]. The American version of the "Church of Humanity" was largely modeled on the English church. Like the English version, it was not atheistic and had sermons and sacramental rites.<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eUnCQ6dD0YEC&q=%22church+of+humanity%22+positivist&pg=PA23|title=Positivist Republic|access-date=12 June 2015|isbn=978-0271039909|last1=Harp|first1=Gillis J.|date=2010-11-01|publisher=Penn State Press }}</ref> At times the services included readings from conventional religious works like the [[Book of Isaiah]].<ref>{{Cite news | url=https://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9F03E4DE1730EE3ABC4E52DFB766838A699FDE | title=A Positivist Festival| journal=The New York Times| date=1881-01-16}}</ref> It was not as significant as the church in England, but did include several educated people.<ref>{{Cite journal |jstor = 3169031|title = "The Church of Humanity": New York's Worshipping Positivists|journal = Church History|volume = 60|issue = 4|pages = 508–523|last1 = Harp|first1 = Gillis J.|year = 1991|doi = 10.2307/3169031| s2cid=162304255 }}</ref>

===Ethical movement===

[[File:Conway Hall, Red Lion Square, London 07.jpg|thumb|[[Conway Hall]] in London]]
Another important precursor was the [[ethical movement]] of the 19th century. The [[South Place Ethical Society]] was founded in 1793 as the [[South Place Chapel]] on [[Finsbury Square]], on the edge of the [[City of London]],<ref name="City of London">[https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/services/environment-and-planning/planning/heritage-and-design/conservation-areas/Documents/Finsbury%20Circus%20Character%20Summary.pdf] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304054149/https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/services/environment-and-planning/planning/heritage-and-design/conservation-areas/Documents/Finsbury%20Circus%20Character%20Summary.pdf|date=4 March 2016}}, City of London page on Finsbury Circus Conservation Area Character Summary.</ref> and in the early nineteenth century was known as "a radical gathering-place".<ref>''The Sexual Contract'', by Carole Patema. p. 160</ref> At that point it was a [[General Assembly of Unitarian and Free Christian Churches|Unitarian]] chapel, and that movement, like Quakers, supported female equality.<ref>{{cite web| url = http://www.keele.ac.uk/history/currentundergraduates/tltp/WOMEN/RENDELL/CORE1.HTM#Title| title = "Women's Politics in Britain 1780–1870: Claiming Citizenship" by Jane Rendall, esp. "72. The religious backgrounds of feminist activists"}}</ref> Under the leadership of Reverend [[William Johnson Fox]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ethicalsoc.org.uk/history.htm |title=Ethical Society history page |publisher=Ethicalsoc.org.uk |access-date=2013-09-29 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20000118230842/http://www.ethicalsoc.org.uk/history.htm |archive-date=18 January 2000}}</ref> it lent its pulpit to activists such as [[Anna Wheeler (author)|Anna Wheeler]], one of the first women to campaign for feminism at public meetings in England, who spoke in 1829 on "rights of women". In later decades, the chapel changed its name to the South Place Ethical Society, now the [[Conway Hall Ethical Society]]. Today Conway Hall explicitly identifies itself as a humanist organisation, albeit one primarily focused on concerts, events, and the maintenance of its humanist library and archives. It bills itself as "The landmark of London's independent intellectual, political and cultural life."

In America, the ethical movement was propounded by [[Felix Adler (professor)|Felix Adler]], who established the [[New York Society for Ethical Culture]] in 1877.<ref>Howard B. Radest. 1969. ''Toward Common Ground: The Story of the Ethical Societies in the United States.''  New York: Fredrick Unger Publishing Co.</ref> By 1886, similar societies had sprouted up in Philadelphia, Chicago and St. Louis.<ref name=Campbell>Colin Campbell. 1971. ''Towards a Sociology of Irreligion.'' London: MacMillan Press.</ref>

These societies all adopted the same statement of principles:
*The belief that morality is independent of theology;
*The affirmation that new moral problems have arisen in modern industrial society which have not been adequately dealt with by the world's religions;
*The duty to engage in philanthropy in the advancement of morality;
*The belief that self-reform should go in lock step with social reform;
*The establishment of republican rather than monarchical governance of Ethical societies;
*The agreement that educating the young is the most important aim.

In effect, the movement responded to the religious crisis of the time by replacing theology with unadulterated morality. It aimed to "disentangle moral ideas from [[religious doctrines]], [[metaphysics|metaphysical]] systems, and ethical theories, and to make them an independent force in personal life and social relations."<ref name=Campbell/> Adler was also particularly critical of the religious emphasis on creed, believing it to be the source of sectarian bigotry. He therefore attempted to provide a universal fellowship devoid of ritual and ceremony, for those who would otherwise be divided by creeds. Although the organisation was overwhelmingly made up of (and entirely led by) atheists, and were many of the same people as in the secular movement, Ethical organisations at that time publicly avoided debate about religious beliefs, publicly advocating neither [[atheism]] nor [[theism]], [[agnosticism]] nor [[deism]], instead stressing "deed without creed" and a "purely human basis" for morality.<ref name=Campbell/>

The first ethical society along these lines in Britain was founded in 1886. By 1896 the four London societies formed the Union of Ethical Societies, and between 1905 and 1910 there were over fifty societies in Great Britain, seventeen of which were affiliated with the Union. The Union of Ethical Societies would later incorporate as the Ethical Union, a registered charity, in 1928. Under the leadership of [[Harold Blackham]], it renamed itself the British Humanist Association in 1967. It became the [[Humanists UK]] in 2017.

===Secular humanism===
In the 1930s, "humanism" was generally used in a religious sense by the Ethical movement in the United States, and not much favoured among the non-religious in Britain. Yet "it was from the Ethical movement that the non-religious philosophical sense of ''Humanism'' gradually emerged in Britain, and it was from the convergence of the Ethical and Rationalist movements that this sense of ''Humanism'' eventually prevailed throughout the [[Freethought]] movement".<ref>Walter, Nicolas (1997). ''Humanism: what's in the word?'' London: RPA/BHA/Secular Society Ltd, p. 43.</ref>

As an organised movement in its own right, humanism emerged from vibrant non-religious movements of the 18th and 19th centuries such as the Owenites, Ethical Culture, the freethinkers, secularists, and positivists, as well as a few non-religious radical Unitarian congregations. The first [[Humanist Manifesto]] announced the humanist movement by that name to the public in 1933, following work at the University of Chicago across the 1920s.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.americanhumanist.org/Who_We_Are/About_Humanism/Humanist_Manifesto_I |title=Text of Humanist Manifesto I |publisher=Americanhumanist.org |access-date=13 November 2011 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111107221355/http://www.americanhumanist.org/who_we_are/about_humanism/Humanist_Manifesto_I |archive-date=7 November 2011}}</ref> The American Humanist Association was incorporated as an [[Illinois]] non-profit organization in 1943. The International Humanist and Ethical Union was founded in 1952, when a gathering of world Humanists met under the leadership of [[Sir Julian Huxley]]. The [[British Humanist Association]] took that name in 1967, but had developed from the Union of Ethical Societies which had been founded by [[Stanton Coit]] in 1896.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.humanism.org.uk/about/history |title=British Humanist Association: History |publisher=Humanism.org.uk |access-date=13 November 2011 |archive-date=24 November 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121124042907/http://www.humanism.org.uk/about/history |url-status=dead }}</ref>

==Manifestos and declarations==
[[File:Happyman.svg|thumb|100px|Organizations like [[Humanists International]] use the "[[Happy Human]]" symbol, based on a 1965 design by Denis Barrington.]] 
Humanists have put together various [[Humanist Manifesto]]s, in attempts to unify the Humanist identity.

The original signers of the [[Humanist Manifesto I|first Humanist Manifesto]] of 1933, declared themselves to be [[Religious humanism|religious humanists]]. Because, in their view, traditional religions were failing to meet the needs of their day, the signers of 1933 declared it a necessity to establish a religion that was a dynamic force to meet the needs of the day. However, this "religion" did not profess a belief in any god. Since then [[Humanist Manifesto|two additional Manifestos]] were written to replace the first. In the Preface of Humanist Manifesto II, in 1973, the authors [[Paul Kurtz]] and [[Edwin H. Wilson]] assert that faith and knowledge are required for a hopeful vision for the future. Manifesto II references a section on religion and states traditional religion renders a disservice to humanity. Manifesto&nbsp;II recognizes the following groups to be part of their naturalistic philosophy: "scientific", "ethical", "democratic", "religious", and "Marxist" humanism.

===Humanists International===
{{quote frame|quote=Humanist beliefs and values are as old as civilization and have a history in most societies around the world. Modern humanism is the culmination of these long traditions of reasoning about meaning and ethics, the source of inspiration for many of the world’s great thinkers, artists, and humanitarians, and is interwoven with the rise of modern science.|author= Humanists International| source= Amsterdam Declaration 2022<ref name="Amsterdam"/>}}

The [[Amsterdam Declaration]] is the name of an attempt by humanist organisations around the world to define humanism. First passed in 1952 at the inaugural general assembly of [[Humanists International]]  (then known as the International Humanist and Ethical Union), it was subsequently revised in 2002<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.iheu.org/amsterdamdeclaration |title=Amsterdam Declaration 2002 |access-date=5 July 2008 |publisher=International Humanist and Ethical Union |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080509080606/http://www.iheu.org/amsterdamdeclaration |archive-date=9 May 2008}}</ref> and again in 2022. The wording of the 1952 declaration reflected some contemporary anxieties relating to the Cold War, while the 2002 Declaration was an attempt to substantially simplify the statement and make it less time-bound and more internationally accessible.<ref name="Amsterdam"/> 

The 2022 declaration mentions religion only once, and explains that its purpose is to "make people aware of these essentials of the humanist worldview," which it details under four headings.<ref name="Amsterdam">{{Cite web|url=https://humanists.international/what-is-humanism/the-amsterdam-declaration/|title=The Amsterdam Declaration|accessdate=29 July 2025|work=[[Humanists International]]}}</ref>

# Humanists strive to be ethical
# Humanists strive to be rational
# Humanists strive for fulfilment in their lives
# Humanism meets the widespread demand for a source of meaning and purpose and to stand as an alternative to dogmatic religion, authoritarian nationalism, tribal sectarianism, and selfish nihilism<ref name="Amsterdam"/>

Since 1996, all member organisations of Humanist International have been required to accept the organisation's definition of humanism, which is as follows:<ref>{{cite web|url=https://humanists.international/policy/iheu-minimum-statement-on-humanism/|title=IHEU Minimum Statement on Humanism|work=Humanists International|accessdate=29 July 2025}}</ref>
<blockquote>Humanism is a democratic and ethical life stance, which affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives. It stands for the building of a more humane society through an ethic based on human and other natural values in the spirit of reason and free inquiry through human capabilities. It is not [[theism|theistic]], and it does not accept [[supernatural]] views of reality.

</blockquote>

Traditionally, Humanists International policy also encouraged its members to take steps to promote a uniform global identity for humanism, including by discouraging the use of "hyphenated adjectives" (such as "secular" humanism or "[[religious humanism]]") and instead refer simply to "Humanism" [[life stance orthography|with a capital H]], and through global usage of the [[Happy Human]] symbol to represent humanism.<ref name=Blackham/>

===Council for Secular Humanism===
According to the Council for Secular Humanism, within the United States, the term "secular humanism" describes a world view with the following elements and principles:<ref name="what">{{cite web
|url= http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=main&page=what
|title= What Is Secular Humanism?
|publisher= Council for Secular Humanism
|access-date= 2 October 2005
|archive-date= 15 September 2011
|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110915030026/http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?page=what&section=main
|url-status= dead
}}</ref>

*'''Need to test beliefs'''&nbsp;– A conviction that dogmas, ideologies and traditions, whether religious, political or social, must be weighed and tested by each individual and not simply accepted by faith.
*'''Reason, evidence, [[scientific method]]'''&nbsp;– A commitment to the use of critical reason, factual evidence and scientific method of inquiry in seeking solutions to human problems and answers to important human questions.
* '''Fulfillment, growth, creativity'''&nbsp;– A primary concern with fulfillment, growth and creativity for both the individual and humankind in general.
* '''Search for truth'''&nbsp;– A constant search for objective truth, with the understanding that new knowledge and experience constantly alter our imperfect perception of it.
* '''This life'''&nbsp;– A concern for this life (as opposed to an [[afterlife]]) and a commitment to making it meaningful through better understanding of ourselves, our history, our intellectual and artistic achievements, and the outlooks of those who differ from us.
* '''[[Secular ethics#Humanist ethics|Ethics]]'''&nbsp;– A search for viable individual, social and political principles of ethical conduct, judging them on their ability to enhance human well-being and individual responsibility.
* '''Justice and fairness'''&nbsp;– an interest in securing justice and fairness in society and in eliminating discrimination and intolerance.<ref>{{cite web
  | title = The Affirmations of Humanism: A Statement of Principles
  | work = secularhumanism.org
  | publisher = The Council for Secular Humanism
  | url = http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?page=affirmations&section=main
  | access-date = 28 May 2012
  | archive-date = 9 June 2012
  | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20120609003223/http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=main&page=affirmations
  | url-status = dead
  }}</ref>
* '''Building a better world'''&nbsp;– A conviction that with reason, an open exchange of ideas, good will, and tolerance, progress can be made in building a better world for ourselves and our children.

''[[A Secular Humanist Declaration]]'' was issued in 1980 by the Council for Secular Humanism's predecessor, CODESH. It lays out ten ideals: Free inquiry as opposed to censorship and imposition of belief; separation of church and state; the ideal of freedom from religious control and from jingoistic government control; ethics based on critical intelligence rather than that deduced from religious belief; moral education; religious skepticism; reason; a belief in science and technology as the best way of understanding the world; evolution; and education as the essential method of building humane, free, and democratic societies.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=main&page=declaration|title=A Secular Humanist Declaration|publisher=the Council for Secular Humanism|author=the Council for Secular Humanism|year=1980|access-date=27 November 2008|archive-date=17 August 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080817084107/http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=main&page=declaration|url-status=dead}}</ref>

===American Humanist Association===
A general outline of Humanism is also set out in the ''[[Humanist Manifesto]]'' prepared by the [[American Humanist Association]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.americanhumanist.org/3/HumandItsAspirations.php |title=Humanism and Its Aspirations – Humanist Manifesto III, a successor to the Humanist Manifesto of 1933 |publisher=Americanhumanist.org |access-date=13 November 2011 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070809103515/http://www.americanhumanist.org/3/HumandItsAspirations.php |archive-date=9 August 2007}}</ref>

==Ethics and relationship to religious belief==
{{See also|Secular ethics}}
In the 20th and 21st centuries, members of Humanist organizations have disagreed as to whether Humanism is a religion. They categorize themselves in one of three ways. [[Religious humanism|Religious (or ethical) humanism]], in the tradition of the earliest humanist organizations in the UK and US, attempts to fulfil the traditional social role of religion. Contemporary use of the word "religious" did not have the same connotations as its today.<ref>{{Cite book|title=The Genesis of a Humanist Manifesto|author=Wilson, Edwin H.|year=1995|publisher=Humanist Press|location=Amherst, NY}} This book quotes the constitution of the Humanistic Religious Association of London, founded in 1853, as saying, "In forming ourselves into a progressive religious body, we have adopted the name 'Humanistic Religious Association' to convey the idea that Religion is a principle inherent in man and is a means of developing his being towards greater perfection. We have emancipated ourselves from the ancient compulsory dogmas, myths and ceremonies borrowed of old from Asia and still pervading the ruling churches of our age".</ref> Secular humanism considers all forms of religion, including religious humanism, to be superseded.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Living Without Religion: Eupraxophy|author=Kurtz, Paul|year=1995|publisher=Prometheus Books|location=Amherst, NY|page=8}}</ref>

However, distinctions between "ethical" and "secular" humanists are for the most part historical, and practically meaningless in the present day or to contemporary individuals who identify with humanism. Since the mid-20th century, the development of new concepts such as the "[[life stance#Humanism|life stance]]" (which encompasses both humanist views and religious outlooks) has defused this conflict. Most humanist organisations identify with "humanism" without a pre-modifier (such a "secular" or "ethical") and assert humanism as a non-religious philosophy or approach to life. Generally speaking, all humanists, including religious humanists, reject deference to supernatural beliefs; promote the practical, [[methodological naturalism]] of science; and largely endorse the stance of [[metaphysical naturalism]].<ref>[http://ncse.com/religion/science-religion-methodology-humanism Eugenie C. Scott, National Centre for Science and Education, "Science and Religion, Methodology and Humanism"]: "science must be limited to using just natural forces in its explanations.This is sometimes referred to as the principle of methodological materialism in science ... Scientists use only methodological materialism because it is logical, but primarily because it works. We don't need to use supernatural forces to explain nature, and we get farther in our understanding of nature by relying on natural causes."</ref> The result is an approach to issues in a secular way. Humanism addresses ethics without reference to the supernatural as well, attesting that ethics is a human enterprise (see [[naturalistic ethics]]).<ref name="americanhumanist"/><ref name="oxford-secularhumanism"/><ref name="humaniststudies"/>

Accounts of humanism are also careful not to treat secular humanism analogously with religions, which implies a community who strictly attempt to adhere to the same obligations or beliefs. Holding a secular humanist philosophy does not prescribe a specific theory of morality or code of ethics. As stated by the Council for Secular Humanism,
{{blockquote|Secular Humanism is not so much a specific morality as it is a method for the explanation and discovery of rational moral principles.<ref name="A Secular Humanist Declaration">{{cite web |url=http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=main&page=declaration#morals |title=A Secular Humanist Declaration |publisher=Secularhumanism.org |date=29 July 2005 |access-date=13 November 2011 |archive-date=17 August 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080817084107/http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=main&page=declaration#morals |url-status=dead }}</ref>}}

Secular humanists affirm that with the present state of scientific knowledge, dogmatic belief in an absolutist moral or ethical system (e.g. Kantian, Islamic, Christian) is unreasonable. However, it affirms that individuals engaging in rational moral/ethical deliberations can discover some universal "objective standards".
{{blockquote|We are opposed to absolutist morality, yet we maintain that objective standards emerge, and ethical values and principles may be discovered, in the course of ethical deliberation.<ref name="A Secular Humanist Declaration"/>}}

Many humanists adopt principles of the [[Golden Rule (ethics)|Golden Rule]]. Some believe that universal moral standards are required for the proper functioning of society. However, they believe such necessary universality can and should be achieved by developing a richer notion of morality through reason, experience and scientific inquiry rather than through faith in a supernatural realm or source.<ref>{{Cite book|title=On Humanism|last=Norman|first=Richard|publisher=Routledge|year=2004|isbn=9780415305228|location=New York}}</ref>
{{blockquote|Fundamentalists correctly perceive that universal moral standards are required for the proper functioning of society. But they erroneously believe that God is the only possible source of such standards. Philosophers as diverse as [[Plato]], [[Immanuel Kant]], [[John Stuart Mill]], [[George Edward Moore]], and [[John Rawls]] have demonstrated that it is possible to have a universal morality without God. Contrary to what the fundamentalists would have us believe, then, what our society really needs is not more religion but a richer notion of the nature of morality.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://secularhumanism.org/1997/06/morality-requires-god-or-does-it/ |title=Morality Requires God ... or Does It? |author=Theodore Schick, Jr |publisher=Secularhumanism.org |date=29 July 2005 |access-date=12 December 2020}}</ref>}}

Humanists [[Andrew Copson]] and [[Alice Roberts]], in their [[self-help book|casual introduction]] to humanism ''The Little Book of Humanism'', propose that a distinctive aspect of humanist morality is its recognition that every moral situation is in some sense unique, and so potentially calls for different approach than the last (i.e. the ability to vacillate situationally between [[consequentialism]] and [[virtue ethics]]).<ref>{{cite book|title=The Little Book of Humanism|date=2020|publisher=[[Little, Brown|Piaktus]]|last1=Copson|last2=Roberts|first1=Andrew|first2=Alice|quote=Every time we have to make a difficult moral choice, there will be something new and different about it. So applying the same rule every time is not going to work. It doesn't mean our values have changed. It's more that the situations in which we apply them are different – and so we make different choices in practice.<br>This requires careful thought. Sometimes, we might find we've settled into ways of thinking that mean we're applying rules, even if those are own rules. We need to challenge ourselves – not just acting on what seems like instinct or intuition but going back to thinking carefully about consequences and virtues again.|pages=94–95}}</ref> In the book, they quote from [[Kristen Bell]]'s advocacy of [[moral particularism]] as developed by [[Jonathan Dancy]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/kristen-bell-drops-some-ethical-gems-she-learned-on-the-good-place_n_5d4c6edde4b0066eb70ebb0a|title=Kristen Bell Drops Some Ethical Gems She Learned On 'The Good Place'|last=Yam|first=Kimberly|date=9 August 2018|accessdate=1 February 2021}}</ref>

Humanism is compatible with [[atheism]], and by definition usually entails at least a form of [[weak atheism|weak]] or [[agnostic atheism]],<ref>{{Cite book
| last=Baggini
| first=Julian
| author-link=Julian Baggini
| title=Atheism: A Very Short Introduction
| pages=3–4
| quote=The atheist's rejection of belief in God is usually accompanied by a broader rejection of any [[supernatural]] or [[transcendence (religion)|transcendental]] reality. For example, an atheist does not usually believe in the existence of immortal [[soul]]s, [[afterlife|life after death]], ghosts, or supernatural powers. Although strictly speaking an atheist could believe in any of these things and still remain an atheist... the arguments and ideas that sustain atheism tend naturally to rule out other beliefs in the supernatural or transcendental.
| publisher=Oxford: Oxford University Press
| year=2003
| isbn=0-19-280424-3}}</ref> and agnosticism,<ref>
{{Cite book
| editor-last=Winston
| editor-first=Robert 
| title=Human
| quote=Neither atheism nor agnosticism is a full belief system, because they have no fundamental philosophy or lifestyle requirements. These forms of thought are simply the absence of belief in, or denial of, the existence of deities.
| publisher=New York: DK Publishing, Inc
| year=2004
| isbn=0-7566-1901-7
| page=299}}</ref>
but being atheist or agnostic does not automatically make one a humanist. Nevertheless, humanism is diametrically opposed to [[state atheism]].<ref name="Tolerance">{{cite book|author1=Paul Kurtz |author2=Vern L. Bullough |author3=Tim Madigan |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=e9OJSW5dkM8C&q=militant+atheist+deaths&pg=PA250|title=Toward a New Enlightenment: the Philosophy of Paul Kurtz|publisher=Transaction Books|quote=In the past, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union waged unremitting warfare against religion. It persecuted religious believers, confiscated church properties, executed or exiled tens of thousands of clerics, and prohibited believers to engage in religious instruction or publish religious materials. It has also carried on militant pro-atheist propaganda campaigns as part of the official ideology of the state, in an effort to establish a "new Soviet man" committed to the ideals of Communist society. Mikhail Gorbachev is dismantling such policies by permitting greater freedom of religious conscience. If his reforms proceed unabated, they could have dramatic implications for the entire Communist world, for the Russians may be moving from militant atheism to tolerant humanism.|date=19 October 2009|isbn=978-1-56000-118-8}}</ref><ref name="KurtzCriticism">{{cite book
|author1=Paul Kurtz |author2=Vern L. Bullough |author3=Tim Madigan |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=e9OJSW5dkM8C&q=militant+atheist+deaths&pg=PA250
|title=Toward a New Enlightenment: the Philosophy of Paul Kurtz
|publisher=Transaction Books
|quote=Ranged against the true believer are the militant atheists, who adamantly reject the faith as false stupid, and reactionary. They consider all religious believers to be gullible fools and claim that they are given to accepting gross exaggerations and untenable premises. Historic religious claims, they think, are totally implausible, unbelievable, disreputable, and controvertible, for they go beyond the bounds of reason. Militant atheists can find no value at all to any religious beliefs or institutions. They resist any effort to engage in inquiry or debate. Madalyn Murray O'Hair is as arrogant in her rejection of religion as is the true believer in his or her profession of faith. This form of atheism thus becomes mere dogma.|date=19 October 2009
|isbn=978-1-56000-118-8}}</ref>
According to [[Paul Kurtz]], considered by some to be the founder of the American secular humanist movement,<ref name="Humanism">{{cite book
|url=http://www.pointofinquiry.org/paul_kurtz_the_new_atheism_and_secular_humanism/
|title=The New Atheism and Secular Humanism|publisher=Center for Inquiry|quote=Paul Kurtz, considered by many the father of the secular humanist movement, is Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the State University of New York at Buffalo.
|date=19 October 2009}}</ref> one of the differences between Marxist–Leninist atheists and [[humanists]] is the latter's commitment to "human freedom and democracy" while stating that the militant atheism of the Soviet Union consistently violated basic human rights.<ref name="Rights">{{cite book|author1=Paul Kurtz |author2=Vern L. Bullough |author3=Tim Madigan |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=e9OJSW5dkM8C&q=militant+atheist+deaths&pg=PA250|title=Toward a New Enlightenment: the Philosophy of Paul Kurtz|publisher=Transaction Books|quote=There have been fundamental and irreconcilable differences between humanists and atheists, particularly Marxist-Leninists. The defining characteristic of humanism is its commitment to human freedom and democracy; the kind of atheism practiced in the Soviet Union has consistently violated basic human rights. Humanists believe first and foremost in the freedom of conscience, the free mind, and the right of dissent. The defense of religious liberty is as precious to the humanist as are the rights of the believers.|date=19 October 2009|isbn=978-1-56000-118-8}}</ref>
Kurtz also stated that the "defense of [[religious liberty]] is as precious to the humanist as are the rights of the believers".<ref name="Rights" /> Greg M. Epstein states that, "modern, organized Humanism began, in the minds of its founders, as nothing more nor less than a religion without a God".<ref>{{cite book|title= Good Without God: What a Billion Nonreligious People Do Believe|last= Esptein|first= Greg M.|year= 2010|publisher= HarperCollins|location= New York|isbn= 978-0-06-167011-4|url-access= registration|url= https://archive.org/details/goodwithoutgodwh00epst}}</ref>

Many humanists address ethics from the point of view of [[ethical naturalism]], and some support an actual [[science of morality]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/entry/the_science_of_morality/|title=The Science of Morality |date=7 September 2010 |publisher= Center for Inquiry|access-date=12 June 2015}}</ref>

==Modern context==
[[File:American Humanist Association President David Niose.jpg|thumb|left|200px|[[David Niose]], president of the [[American Humanist Association]], speaks at a 2012 conference.]] 
Secular humanist organizations are found in all parts of the world. Those who call themselves humanists are estimated to number between four<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.americanhumanist.org/what_we_do/publications/Humanism_as_the_Next_Step/Chapter_8:_The_Development_of_Organization |title=American humanist association – Publications – Chapter eight: The Development of Organization |publisher=Americanhumanist.org |access-date=13 November 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110604194510/https://americanhumanist.org/what_we_do/publications/Humanism_as_the_Next_Step/Chapter_8:_The_Development_of_Organization |archive-date=4 June 2011 |url-status=dead }}</ref>{{Failed verification|date=November 2021}} and five<ref>{{cite web|url=http://india.humanists.net |title=India humanist |publisher=India.humanists.net |date=25 June 1997 |access-date=13 November 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120204150554/http://india.humanists.net/ |archive-date=4 February 2012 |url-status=dead}}</ref>{{Dubious|1=Adherents|reason=5 million figure is explicitly number "affiliated to the IHEU", not total number of humanists|date=November 2021}} million people worldwide in 31 countries, but there is uncertainty because of the lack of universal definition throughout censuses. Humanism is a non-theistic belief system and, as such, it could be a sub-category of "Religion" only if that term is defined to mean "Religion and (any) [[Life stance|belief system]]". This is the case in the [[International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights]] on [[freedom of religion|freedom of religion ''and'' beliefs]]. Many national censuses contentiously define Humanism as a further sub-category of the sub-category "No Religion", which typically includes atheist, rationalist and agnostic thought. In [[England and Wales|England, Wales]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/census/2011-census/key-statistics-for-local-authorities-in-england-and-wales/sty-religion.html |title=Census 2011 – Ethnicity and religion in England and Wales |publisher=Statistics.gov.uk |date=27 March 2011 |access-date=13 November 2011}}</ref> 25% of people specify that they have 'No religion' up from 15% in 2001 and in Australia,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/2071.0~2016~Main%20Features~Religion%20Data%20Summary~25 |title=RELIGION IN AUSTRALIA |date=26 September 2017 |access-date=16 October 2017 |publisher=Australian Bureau of Statistics |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170920073309/http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/2071.0~2016~Main%20Features~Religion%20Data%20Summary~25 |archive-date=20 September 2017}}</ref> around 30% of the population specifies "No Religion" in the national census. In the US, the decennial census does not inquire about religious affiliation or its lack; surveys report the figure at roughly 13%.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html#religions |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/19990508224844/http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html#religions |url-status=usurped |archive-date=8 May 1999 |title=Top Twenty Religions in the United States, 2001 (self-identification, ARIS) |publisher=Adherents.com |access-date=13 November 2011}}</ref> In the 2001 Canadian census, 16.5% of the populace reported having no religious affiliation.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/demo30a.htm |title=Statistics Canada – Population by religion, by province and territory (2001 Census) |publisher=0.statcan.ca |date=25 January 2005 |access-date=13 November 2011 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060209103348/http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/demo30a.htm |archive-date=9 February 2006}}</ref> In the 2011 [[Scotland|Scottish]] census, 37% stated they had no religion up from 28% in 2001.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.scotlandscensus.gov.uk/ethnicity-identity-language-and-religion |title=Scotland's Census - Ethnicity, Identity, Language and Religion |publisher=scotlandscensus.gov.uk |date=2017 |access-date=26 May 2017}}</ref> One of the largest Humanist organizations in the world (relative to population) is [[Norway]]'s ''[[Human-Etisk Forbund]]'',<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.human.no/Servicemeny/English/|title=Human-Etisk Forbund|access-date=12 June 2015|archive-date=23 March 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160323135954/http://human.no/Servicemeny/English/|url-status=dead}}</ref> which had over 86,000 members out of a population of around 4.6 million in 2013 – approximately 2% of the population.<ref>{{cite web| url = https://www.ssb.no/statistikkbanken/SelectVarVal/saveselections.asp| title = Norway – Members of philosophical2 communities outside the Church of Norway. 1990–2013.}}</ref>

[[File:Levi Fragell, print.jpg|thumb|right|140px|[[Levi Fragell]], former Secretary General of the [[Norwegian Humanist Association]] and former president of the [[International Humanist and Ethical Union]], at the World Humanist Congress 2011 in Oslo]]  
The International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU) is the worldwide umbrella organization for those adhering to the Humanist life stance. It represents the views of over three million Humanists organized in over 100 national organizations in 30 countries.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://iheu.org/membership/our-members|title=International Humanist and Ethical Union - Our members|access-date=12 June 2015}}</ref> Originally based in the [[Netherlands]], the IHEU now operates from London.  Some regional groups that adhere to variants of the Humanist life stance, such as the humanist subgroup of the [[Unitarian Universalist Association]], do not belong to the IHEU. Although the [[European Humanist Federation]] is also separate from the IHEU, the two organisations work together and share an agreed protocol.<ref>{{cite web|author=International Humanist and Ethical Union |url=http://www.iheu.org/iheu-and-ehf-agree-revised-protocol |title=''IHEU and EHF agree revised protocol'', 24 February 2009 |publisher=Iheu.org |access-date=13 November 2011}}</ref>

Starting in the mid-20th century, religious [[fundamentalists]] and the [[Christian right|religious right]] began using the term "secular humanism" in hostile fashion. [[Francis A. Schaeffer]], an American theologian based in Switzerland, seizing upon the exclusion of the divine from most humanist writings, argued that rampant secular humanism would lead to moral relativism and ethical bankruptcy in his book ''How Should We Then Live: The Rise and Decline of Western Thought and Culture'' (1976). Schaeffer portrayed secular humanism as pernicious and diabolical, and warned it would undermine the moral and spiritual tablet of America. His themes have been very widely repeated in [[Fundamentalist]] preaching in North America.<ref>Randall Balmer, ''Encyclopedia of Evangelicalism'' 2002 p. 516</ref> Toumey (1993) found that secular humanism is typically portrayed as a vast evil conspiracy, deceitful and immoral, responsible for feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality, and [[New Age]] spirituality.<ref>Christopher P. Toumey, "Evolution and secular humanism," ''Journal of the American Academy of Religion,'' Summer 1993, Vol. 61 Issue 2, pp. 275–301</ref> In certain areas of the world, Humanism finds itself in conflict with religious fundamentalism, especially over the issue of the [[separation of church and state]]. Many Humanists see religions as superstitious, repressive and closed-minded, while religious fundamentalists may see Humanists as a threat to the values set out in their sacred texts.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://english.islamway.com/bindex.php?section=lessons&lesson_id=399&scholar_id=38 |title=IslamWay Radio |publisher=English.islamway.com |access-date=13 November 2011}}</ref>

In recent years, humanists such as Dwight Gilbert Jones and [[R. Joseph Hoffmann]] have decried the over-association of Humanism with affirmations of non-belief and atheism. Jones cites a lack of new ideas being presented or debated outside of secularism,<ref>{{cite book |last=Jones |first=Dwight |year=2009 |title=Essays in the Philosophy of Humanism |volume=17 |issue=1 |url=http://www.essaysinhumanism.org/ |access-date=7 July 2015 |archive-date=22 February 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140222074313/http://www.essaysinhumanism.org/ |url-status=dead }}</ref> while Hoffmann is unequivocal: "I regard the use of the term 'humanism' to mean secular humanism or atheism to be one of the greatest tragedies of twentieth century movementology, perpetrated by second-class minds and perpetuated by third-class polemicists and village atheists. The attempt to sever humanism from the religious and the spiritual was a flatfooted, largely American way of taking on the religious right. It lacked finesse, subtlety, and the European sense of history."<ref>{{cite web| url = http://humanism.ws/featured/the-essence-of-humanism/| title = R. Joseph Hoffmann, ''Humanism – What it isn't,'' posted 7 July 2012 on "@Humanism" blog| access-date = 6 July 2015| archive-date = 26 September 2018| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20180926124244/http://humanism.ws/featured/the-essence-of-humanism/| url-status = dead}}</ref>

==Humanist celebrations==
Humanism, as a term which describes a person's non-religious views, comes with no obligation to celebrate or revere specific days in the year as a religion would. As a result, individual humanists choose of their own accord whether to take part in prevailing national holidays where they live. For example, humanists in Europe and North America typically celebrate holidays, such as [[Christmas]], but as secular holidays rather than Christian festivals.<ref>{{cite web| url = http://humanism.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/aspects-of-humanism-source-book-2012.pdf| title = "A humanist discussion of… Religious Festivals and Ceremonies"}}</ref> Other humanists choose to mark the [[Winter solstice|winter]] and [[summer solstice| summer]] solstices and the [[equinox]]es. European humanists may often emphasise the fact that human beings have found reasons to celebrate at these times in the Northern Hemisphere for thousands of years before the arrival of Christianity.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/christmas-humanist-celebration-jesus-religion-family-a9260146.html|title=I'm a humanist who loves Christmas – for me, it's much more than a religious event|work=[[The Independent]]|author=Andrew Copson|author-link=Andrew Copson|access-date=4 November 2020|date=25 December 2017}}</ref> Humanists may also identify culturally with religious traditions and holidays celebrated in their family in the community. For example, humanists with a Jewish identity will often celebrate most Jewish holidays in a secular manner.

Humanists International endorses [[World Humanist Day]] (21 June), [[Darwin Day]] (12 February), [[Human Rights Day]] (10 December) and [[HumanLight]] (23 December) as official days of humanist celebration, though none are yet a public holiday. Humanist organisations typically organise events around these dates which draw attention to their programmes of activities.

In many countries, [[humanist celebrant]]s (officiants) perform [[celebrancy]] services for weddings, funerals, [[Naming ceremony|child namings]], [[Secular coming of age ceremony|coming of age ceremonies]], and other rituals. In countries like Scotland and Norway, these are extremely popular. In Scotland, more people have a humanist wedding than are married by any religious denomination, including Scotland's largest churches; over 20% of Scottish weddings are humanist. In Norway, over 20% of young people choose humanist coming-of-age ceremonies every year.

==Legal mentions in the United States==

The issue of whether and in what sense secular humanism might be considered a religion, and what the implications of this would be, has become the subject of legal maneuvering and political debate in the United States. The first reference to "secular humanism" in a US legal context was in [[#Torcaso v. Watkins|1961]], although church-state separation lawyer [[Leo Pfeffer]] had referred to it in his 1958 book, ''Creeds in Competition''.

===Hatch amendment===
{{more citations needed|section|date=June 2020}}
The [[Education for Economic Security Act of 1984]] included a section, Section 20 U.S.C.A. 4059, which initially read: "Grants under this subchapter ['Magnet School Assistance'] may not be used for consultants, for transportation or for any activity which does not augment academic improvement." With no public notice, Senator [[Orrin Hatch]] tacked onto the proposed exclusionary subsection the words "or for any course of instruction the substance of which is Secular Humanism". Implementation of this provision ran into practical problems because neither the Senator's staff, nor the Senate's [[United States Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources|Committee on Labor and Human Resources]], nor the [[Department of Justice]] could propose a definition of what would constitute a "course of instruction the substance of which is Secular Humanism". So, this determination was left up to local school boards. The provision provoked a storm of controversy which within a year led Senator Hatch to propose, and Congress to pass, an amendment to delete from the statute all reference to secular humanism. While this episode did not dissuade fundamentalists from continuing to object to what they regarded as the "teaching of Secular Humanism", it did point out the vagueness of the claim.

===Case law===

====''Torcaso v. Watkins''====
The phrase "secular humanism" became prominent after it was used in the [[United States Supreme Court]] case ''[[Torcaso v. Watkins]].'' In the 1961 decision, Justice [[Hugo Black]] commented in a footnote, "Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the [[existence of God]] are [[Buddhism]], [[Taoism]], [[Ethical Culture]], Secular Humanism, and others."

====''Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda''====
The footnote in ''Torcaso v. Watkins'' referenced ''[[Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda]]'',<ref>[http://online.ceb.com/CalCases/CA2/153CA2d673.htm ''Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda''], 153 Cal.App.2d 673, 315 P.2d 394 (1957).</ref> a 1957 case in which an organization of humanists<ref name="Kalka v Hawk">[http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200006/98-5485a.txt ''Ben Kalka v Kathleen Hawk, et al.''] (US D.C. Appeals No. 98-5485, 2000)</ref> sought a tax exemption on the ground that they used their property "solely and exclusively for religious worship." Despite the group's [[non-theistic]] beliefs, the court determined that the activities of the ''Fellowship of Humanity'', which included weekly Sunday meetings, were analogous to the activities of [[theistic]] churches and thus entitled to an exemption. The ''Fellowship of Humanity'' case itself referred to ''[[Humanism]]'' but did not mention the term ''secular humanism''. Nonetheless, this case was cited by Justice Black to justify the inclusion of secular humanism in the list of religions in his note. Presumably Justice Black added the word ''secular'' to emphasize the non-theistic nature of the ''Fellowship of Humanity'' and distinguish their brand of humanism from that associated with, for example, [[Christian humanism]].

====''Washington Ethical Society v. District of Columbia''====
Another case alluded to in the ''Torcaso v. Watkins'' footnote, and said by some to have established secular humanism as a religion under the law, is the 1957 tax case of ''[[s:Washington Ethical Society v. District of Columbia|Washington Ethical Society v. District of Columbia]]'', 249 F.2d 127 (D.C. Cir. 1957). The ''Washington Ethical Society'' functions much like a church, but regards itself as a non-theistic religious institution, honoring the importance of ethical living without mandating a belief in a [[supernatural]] origin for ethics. The case involved denial of the Society's application for tax exemption as a religious organization. The U.S. Court of Appeals reversed the Tax Court's ruling, defined the Society as a religious organization, and granted its tax exemption. The Society terms its practice [[Ethical Culture]]. Though Ethical Culture is based on a humanist philosophy, it is regarded by some as a type of religious humanism. Hence, it would seem most accurate to say that this case affirmed that a religion need not be [[theistic]] to qualify as a religion under the law, rather than asserting that it established generic secular humanism as a religion.

In the cases of both the ''Fellowship of Humanity'' and the ''Washington Ethical Society,'' the court decisions turned not so much on the particular beliefs of practitioners as on the function and form of the practice being similar to the function and form of the practices in other religious institutions.

====''Peloza v. Capistrano School District''====
The implication in Justice Black's footnote that secular humanism is a religion has been seized upon by religious opponents of the teaching of [[evolution]], who have made the argument that teaching evolution amounts to teaching a religious idea. The claim that secular humanism could be considered a religion for legal purposes was examined by the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit]] in ''[[Peloza v. Capistrano School District]]'', 37 F.3d 517 (9th Cir. 1994), ''cert. denied'', 515 U.S. 1173 (1995). In this case, a science teacher argued that, by requiring him to teach evolution, his school district was forcing him to teach the "religion" of secular humanism. The Court responded, "We reject this claim because neither the Supreme Court, nor this circuit, has ever held that evolutionism or Secular Humanism are 'religions' for [[Establishment Clause]] purposes." The Supreme Court refused to review the case.

The decision in a subsequent case, ''Kalka v. Hawk et al.'', offered this commentary:<ref name="Kalka v Hawk"/>
<blockquote>The Court's statement in ''Torcaso'' does not stand for the proposition that humanism, no matter in what form and no matter how practiced, amounts to a religion under the First Amendment. The Court offered no test for determining what system of beliefs qualified as a "religion" under the First Amendment. The most one may read into the ''Torcaso'' footnote is the idea that a particular non-theistic group calling itself the "Fellowship of Humanity" qualified as a religious organization under California law.</blockquote>

===Controversy===

Decisions about tax status have been based on whether an organization functions like a church. On the other hand, [[Establishment Clause]] cases turn on whether the ideas or symbols involved are inherently religious. An organization can function like a church while advocating beliefs that are not necessarily inherently religious. Author [[Marci Hamilton]] has pointed out: "Moreover, the debate is not between secularists and the religious. The debate is believers and non-believers on the one side debating believers and non-believers on the other side. You've got citizens who are [...] of faith who believe in the separation of church and state and you have a set of believers who do not believe in the separation of church and state."<ref>[http://www.pointofinquiry.org/ Point of Inquiry] [[podcast]] (17:44), 3 February 2006.</ref>

In the 1987 case of ''[[Smith v. Board of School Commissioners of Mobile County]]'' a group of plaintiffs brought a case alleging that the school system was teaching the tenets of an anti-religious religion called "secular humanism" in violation of the Establishment Clause. The complainants asked that 44 different elementary through high school level textbooks (including books on home economics, social science and literature) be removed from the curriculum. Federal judge [[William Brevard Hand]] ruled for the plaintiffs agreeing that the books promoted secular humanism, which he ruled to be a religion. The [[United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit|Eleventh Circuit Court]] unanimously reversed him, with Judge Frank stating that Hand held a "misconception of the relationship between church and state mandated by the establishment clause," commenting also that the textbooks did not show "an attitude antagonistic to theistic belief. The message conveyed by these textbooks is one of neutrality: the textbooks neither endorse theistic religion as a system of belief, nor discredit it".<ref>{{cite book|last=Ivers|first=Greg|title=Redefining the First Freedom: The Supreme Court and the Consolidation of State Power, 1980–1990|year=1992|publisher=Transaction Books|isbn=978-1560000549|pages=[https://archive.org/details/redefiningfirstf00iver/page/47 47–48]|url-access=registration|url=https://archive.org/details/redefiningfirstf00iver/page/47}}</ref>

==Notable humanists==
{{Further|List of secular humanists}}

==Manifestos==
There are numerous Humanist Manifestos and Declarations, including the following:
*[[Humanist Manifesto I]] (1933)
*[[Humanist Manifesto II]] (1973)
*[[A Secular Humanist Declaration]] (1980)
*A Declaration of Interdependence (1988)
*IHEU Minimum Statement on Humanism (1996)
*HUMANISM: Why, What, and What For, in 882 Words (1996)
*Humanist Manifesto 2000: A Call for a New Planetary Humanism (2000)
*The Affirmations of Humanism: A Statement of Principles
*Amsterdam Declaration (2002)
*[[Humanism and Its Aspirations]]: Humanist Manifesto III, a Successor to the Humanist Manifesto of 1933 (2003)
*[[Alternatives to the Ten Commandments]]

==Related organizations==
{{See also|List of secularist organizations}}
{{Columns-list|colwidth=22em|
* [[American Atheists]]
* [[American Humanist Association]]
* [[Brights]]
* [[Camp Quest]]
* [[Center for Inquiry]]
* [[City Congregation for Humanistic Judaism]]
* [[Committee for Skeptical Inquiry]]
* [[Council of Australian Humanist Societies]]
* [[Ethical Culture]]
* [[European Humanist Federation]]
* [[Federation of Indian Rationalist Associations]]
* [[Freedom From Religion Foundation]]
* [[Fusion Party (Australia)|Fusion Party]]
* [[Giordano Bruno Foundation]]
* [[Humanist Canada]]
* [[Humanist Association of Ireland]]
* [[Humanist Society of New Zealand]]
* [[Humanist Society Scotland]]
* [[Humanistischer Verband Deutschlands]]
* [[Humanists International]]
* [[Humanists UK]]
* [[Humanists Sweden]]
* [[Humanity+]]
* [[Institute for Humanist Studies]]
* [[Internet Infidels]]
* [[Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers]]
* [[National Center for Science Education]]
* [[New Zealand Association of Rationalists and Humanists]]
* [[Party of Humanists]]
* [[Philippine Atheism, Agnosticism, and Secularism Incorporated]]
* [[Quackwatch]]
* [[Reason Party (Australia)|Reason Party]]
* [[Romanian Secular-Humanist Association]]
* [[Maharashtra Rationalist Association#Current Status|Sapiens Foundation]]
* [[Secular Party of Australia]]
* [[Scouting for All]]
* [[Secular Student Alliance]]
* [[Sidmennt]] (Iceland)
* [[The Skeptics Society]]
* [[Society for Humanistic Judaism]]
}}

==See also==
{{Columns-list|colwidth=22em|
* [[Effective altruism]]
* [[Empiricism]]
* [[Epicureanism]]
* [[Eupraxsophy]]
* [[Extropianism]]
* [[Marxist humanism]]
* [[Morality without religion]]
* [[Naturalistic pantheism]]
* [[Nontheism]]
* [[Objectivism]]
* [[Rationalism]]
* [[Secular religion]]
* [[Skepticism]]
* [[Stoicism]]
* [[Summum bonum]]
* [[Transhumanism]]
}}

===Wikibooks===
* ''[[b:Thinking And Moral Problems|Thinking And Moral Problems]]''
* ''[[b:Religions And Their Source|Religions And Their Source]]''
* ''[[b:Purpose|Purpose]]''
* ''[[b:Developing A Universal Religion|Developing A Universal Religion]]'', four parts of a [[Wikibooks|Wikibook]]


== Notes and references ==
{{Reflist}}

==Further reading==
{{wikiquote}}
* Bullock, Alan. ''The Humanist Tradition in the West'' (1985), by a leading historian.
* Coleman, T. J. III, (interviewer), Tom Flynn (interviewee) (2014, January), [http://www.religiousstudiesproject.com/podcast/tom-flynn-on-secular-humanism/  "Tom Flynn on 'Secular Humanism'", The Religious Studies Project Podcast Series]
* [[Horace L. Friess|Friess, Horace L.]], ''Felix Adler and Ethical Culture'' (1981).
* Pfeffer, Leo. "The 'Religion' of Secular Humanism", ''Journal of Church and State,'' Summer 1987, Vol. 29 Issue 3, pp.&nbsp;495–507
* Radest, Howard B. ''The Devil and Secular Humanism: The Children of the Enlightenment'' (1990) – a favorable account
* Toumey, Christopher P. "Evolution and secular humanism", ''Journal of the American Academy of Religion,'' Summer 1993, Vol. 61 Issue 2, pp.&nbsp;275–301, focused on fundamentalist attacks.
* {{cite book |last1=Zuckerman |first1=Phil |last2=Shook |first2=John R. |title=The Oxford handbook of secularism |date=2017 |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=New York |isbn=9780199988457 |url=https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/28028}}
* Pinker, Steven ''[[Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress]]'' (2018), Penguin Books

===Primary sources===
* Adler, Felix. ''An Ethical Philosophy of Life'' (1918).
* Ericson, Edward L. ''The Humanist Way: An introduction to ethical humanist religion'' (1988). {{ISBN|978-0804421768}}
* Frankel, Charles. ''The Case for Modern Man'' (1956). {{ISBN|978-1199637154}}
* Hook, Sidney. ''Out of Step: An Unquiet Life in the 20th century'' (1987). {{ISBN|978-0060156329}}
* Huxley, Julian. ''Essay of a Humanist'' (1964). 
* Russell, Bertrand. ''Why I Am Not a Christian'' (1957).

{{Prone to spam|date=December 2014}}
<!--     {{No more links}}

       Please be cautious adding more external links.

Wikipedia is not a collection of links and should not be used for advertising.

     Excessive or inappropriate links will be removed.

 See [[Wikipedia:External links]] and [[Wikipedia:Spam]] for details.

If there are already suitable links, propose additions or replacements on
the article's talk page, or submit your link to the relevant category at
DMOZ (dmoz.org) and link there using {{Dmoz}}.

-->
{{Irreligion}}
{{Philosophy of religion}}
{{Philosophy topics}}
{{Authority control}}
{{Portal bar|Religion|Philosophy}}

[[Category:Secular humanism| ]]