the brights (NY times op-ed)

[Peter A. McGraw]

The first time I heard "secular humanism," it was used by fundamentalist
Christians who seemed to feel that those who subscribed to it didn't have a
right to exist.

"Humanism" in the M-W definition Joanne posted ("a doctrine, attitude, or
way of life centered on human interests or values; esp : a philosophy that
usu. rejects supernaturalism and stresses an individual's dignity and worth
and capacity for self-realization through reason") was in use long before I
began to hear "secular humanism."  In my first year at Antioch College, in
the early 60s, I discovered an organization that had its headquarters in
Yellow Springs and was called the American Humanist Association.  One day,
instead of walking by its office as usual, I wandered in out of curiosity
and discovered that I was a perfect example of a statement that cropped up
now and then in their literature: "Some people are humanists whether they
know it or not."  Having had only negatives (whether in
form--unbeliever--or in connotation--atheist) available to define my
beliefs until then, I discovered there was a positive moniker for them.  I
soon joined and went from being merely a "small-h humanist" to being a
"big-H Humanist," as people in the organization sometimes called themselves.

I let my membership lapse long ago, but I just checked the AHA's web site,
which states that it was founded in 1941.

I don't see the word "secular" anywhere on the AHA site (though admittedly
I didn't look very hard), but about the time I sort of lost contact with
the organization (in the late 60s) there was a new executive director who
was a retired Unitarian minister and was at pains to identify the AHA brand
of humanism as "religious humanism," presumably in contrast to some
"secular" variety.  I'm not sure exactly what he meant.

I also didn't see the word "bright" on the AHA site.

Hmmm--when Irish eyes are smiling, does the world suddenly appear to
populated exclusively by humanist homosexuals?  Seems an unlikely trigger
for such a vision, somehow.

Peter Mc.

--On Monday, July 14, 2003 10:43 AM -0400 "James A. Landau"
<JJJRLandau at AOL.COM> wrote:

>
> I'm being prescriptivist, but members of any organized, or at least
> well-defined, belief group are to be referred to by a title that begins
> with a capital letter:  Democrat-Republican, Socialist, Ethical
> Culturalist, Catholic, Parsee, etc.  As another example, "catholic
> parochial school" is an oxymoron but "Catholic parochial school" is not.
> In fact, when referring to Protestants in the US who insist on literal
> interpretation of the Bible, one generally writes "Fundamentalist"
> rather than "fundamentalist", whether one approves or disapproves of
> them.  (However, "Moslem fundamentalist").
>
> Sometimes the presence or absence of a capital letter distinguishes
> meanings, e.g. Eugene Debs was both a Socialist (member of the Socialist
> Party) and a socialist (a believer in state/people's ownership).
> Similarly kibbutzniks are by definotion communists but relatively few are
> Communists.



*****************************************************************
Peter A. McGraw       Linfield College        McMinnville, Oregon
******************* pmcgraw at linfield.edu ************************