Humanism and America : $b Essays on the outlook of modern civilisation — John Shaqi
Humanism and America : $b Essays on the outlook of modern civilisation
Philosophy
Humanism and America : $b Essays on the outlook of modern civilisation
Humanism; Literature -- Philosophy; Philosophy, Modern; United States -- Civilization -- 20th century
The relation of the humanist to this religious traditionalist can
scarcely be defined too carefully. Between the humanist and the
humanitarian, I have said, there is a clash of first principles.
Between the humanist and the authentic Christian, on the other hand,
there is room for important co-operation. To be sure, many of the
leaders of the early Church were satisfied with nothing short of a
stark supernaturalism and inclined to reject the genuinely humanistic
elements of the ancient civilisation along with its naturalistic
errors. But the orthodox attitude has, in spite of the difficulties
of reconciling otherworldliness with a merely secular wisdom, come
to be one of friendliness to the classical humanities.[13] Mr. T.
S. Eliot is probably close to this attitude when he maintains that
humanism is of very great value, but only in subordination to the
historical Church. As an independent doctrine, at least in any large
way, it is, he maintains, ineffective. A broad survey of the past
does not, however, confirm the view that humanism is thus either
precarious or parasitical. The two most notable manifestations of the
humanistic spirit that the world has seen, that in ancient Greece and
that in Confucian China, did not have the support of Christianity
or any other form of revealed religion. Take again the humanism of
seventeenth-century France: the ideal of the finely poised gentleman
who “does not plume himself on anything” was often allied with
Christianity (“devout humanism”), but it was also found among the
free-thinkers (“libertines”) who were hostile to every form of belief
in the supernatural.
In general, why should not the humanist, it may be asked, devote
himself quietly to his own task--that of effecting an adjustment
between the law of measure and the ever-novel emergencies of actual
living, and at the same time refuse to take sides too decisively in
the great debate between the naturalists and the supernaturalists? If
pressed too hard by the supernaturalists in particular, why should he
not reply in the words of Pope:
“Presume not God to scan;
The proper study of mankind is man”?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account