Thursday, December 14, 2006

Humanist ethical outlook is non-religiously based


Those who are not religious have available to them a rich ethical outlook, all the richer indeed for being the result of reflection as opposed to conditioning.
November 21, 2006 10:00 AM | Printable version

The current quarrel between religious and non-religious outlooks is another chapter in a story whose previous main incidents are be found in the mid-nineteenth century and the early seventeenth century, in connection respectively with Darwin's discoveries in biology and the rise of natural science. Both are moments in the slow but bloody retreat of religion; so too is what is happening now. For, despite all appearances, we are witnessing the death-throes of religion: I make the case for this claim in Prospect Magazine.

Here I wish to comment on something that, in the current climate of debate, has been mainly overlooked: the fact that those who are not religious have available to them a rich ethical outlook, all the richer indeed for being the result of reflection as opposed to conditioning, whose roots lie in classical antiquity when the great tradition of ethical thought in Western philosophy began.

For convenience I use the term "humanists" to denote those whose ethical outlook is non-religiously based - which is, in other words, premised on humanity's best efforts to understand its own nature and circumstances.

Consider what humanists aspire to be as ethical agents. They wish always to respect their fellow human beings, to like them, to honour their strivings and to sympathise with their feelings. They wish to begin every encounter, every relationship, with this attitude, for they keep in mind Emerson's remark that we must give others what we give a painting; namely, the advantage of a good light. Most of their fellow human beings merit this, and respond likewise. Some forfeit it by what they wilfully do. But in all cases the humanists' approach rests on the idea that what shapes people is the complex of facts about the interaction between human nature's biological underpinnings and each individual's social and historical circumstances.

Understanding these things - through the arts and literature, through history and philosophy, through the magnificent endeavour of science, through attentive personal experience and reflection, through close relationships, through the conversation of mankind which all this adds up to - is the great essential for humanists in their quest to live good and achieving lives, to do good to others in the process, and to join with their fellows in building just and decent societies where all can have an opportunity to flourish.

And this is for the sake of this life, in this world, where we suffer and find joy, where we can help one another, and where we need one another's help: the help of the living human hand and heart. A great deal of that help has to be targeted at the other side of what the human heart is - the unkind, angry, hostile, selfish, cruel side; the superstitious, tendentious, intellectually captive, ignorant side - to defeat or mitigate it, to ameliorate the consequences of its promptings, to teach it to be different; and never with lies and bribes.

Humanists distinguish between individuals and the wide variety of belief systems people variously adhere to. Some belief systems (those involving astrology, feng shui, crystal healing, animism...the list is long) they combat robustly because the premises of them are falsehoods - many, indeed, are inanities - and, even more, because too often belief in some of those falsehoods serves as a prompt to murder. Humanists contest them as they would contest any falsehood. But with the exception of the individuals who promote these systems when they should know better, humanism is not against the majority who subscribe to them, for it recognises that they were brought up in them as children, or turn to them out of need, or adhere to them hopefully (sometimes, and perhaps too often, unthinkingly).

These are fellow human beings, and humanists profoundly wish them well; which means too that they wish them to be free, to think for themselves, to see the world through clear eyes. If only, says the humanist, they would have a better knowledge of history! If only they would see what their own leaders think of the simple version of the faiths they adhere to, substituting such sophistry in its place! For whereas the ordinary believer has a somewhat misty notion of a father-cum-policeman-cum-Father Christmas-cum-magician personal deity, their theologians deploy such a polysyllabic, labyrinthine, intricate, sophisticated, complexified approach, that some go so far as to claim (as one current celebrity cleric does) that God does not have to exist to be believed in. The standard basis of religious belief - subjective certainty - is hard enough to contest, being non-rational at source, but this is beyond orbit. It is hard to know which are worse: the theologians who are serious about what they say in these respects, and those who know it for a game.

In contrast to the utter certainties of faith, a humanist has a humbler conception of the nature and current extent of knowledge. All the enquiries that human intelligence conducts into enlarging knowledge make progress always at the expense of generating new questions. Having the intellectual courage to live with this open-endedness and uncertainty, trusting to reason and experiment to gain us increments of understanding, having the absolute integrity to base one's theories on rigorous and testable foundations, and being committed to changing one's mind when shown to be wrong, are the marks of honest minds. In the past humanity was eager to clutch at legends, superstitions and leaps of credulity, to attain quick and simple closure on all that they did not know or understand, to make it seem to themselves that they did know and understand. Humanism recognises this historical fact about the old myths, and sympathises with the needs that drive people in that direction. It points out to such that what feeds their hearts and minds - love, beauty, music, sunshine on the sea, the sound of rain on leaves, the company of friends, the satisfaction that comes from successful effort - is more than the imaginary can ever give them, and that they should learn to re-describe these things - the real things of this world - as what gives life the poetry of its significance.

For that is what humanism is: it is, to repeat and insist, about the value of things human. Its desire to learn from the past, its exhortation to courage in the present, and its espousal of hope for the future, are about real things, real people, real human need and possibility, and the fate of the fragile world we share. It is about human life; it requires no belief in an after life. It is about this world; it requires no belief in another world. It requires no commands from divinities, no promises of reward or threats of punishment, no myths and rituals, either to make sense of things or to serve as a prompt to the ethical life. It requires only open eyes, sympathy, and reason.

Quotes from BHA & MORI - On level of Humanist convictions amongst the British Public.

Quotes from BHA chief executive Hanne Stinson, BHA education and public affairs officer Andrew Copson and BHA Vice Presidents Claire Rayner, Baroness Whitaker and Richard Norman on Ipsos MORI polls (released 24/11/06) on the level of humanist convictions amongst the British public and on how many of the British public believe religious groups and leaders are paid too much attention by Government

(Numbers in brackets refer to endnotes)

Hanne Stinson , chief executive of the British Humanist Association said, �Britain is basically a Humanist country, and this poll shows it. We have always been aware that many people who do not identify themselves as humanists, and this includes quite a few people who do not know what Humanism is, live their lives by what one might describe as humanist principles. People who join the Association often tell us that they have been humanists all their lives, or for the last 20 years or so, but didn�t know it. But it is very encouraging to find that 36% of the British population are not simply non-religious, but actually humanist in their outlook and their morality, and that very many others don�t feel they need religion to understand the universe, or to guide their moral decisions. These people may not belong to the Humanist Association, may not have even heard of Humanism, but they share our attitudes and we speak for them in our campaigns.

�Bishops and Archbishops every day make more extravagant claims about Britain�s alleged Christian values, but here at last is the evidence to show they are wrong. The churches, despite their establishment and institutional privileges, have lost the right to speak for Britain. The Government still makes one concession after another to religion on the basis of that 70% census figure, but if the public resents Government kow-towing to religious leaders almost as much as they resent its subservience to foreign leaders, then ministers really need to think again. They should move towards a secular state in Britain, with the Government neutral on matters of religion and belief, no privileges for any belief system, and public debate conducted in shared language, not dominated by religious pronouncements based on theology.�

Ms Stinson added that her only surprise was that only 42% felt religion got too much attention from Government, and wondered how much higher this figure would have been if respondents had been able to select more than three options from the seven listed. �The other explanation might be a lingering deference to religion that has outlasted mass religious belief. Time and again religious groups get their way against overwhelmingly public opinion. They killed off the Assisted Dying Bill, which 4 out of 5 people supported (1); they have won wide exemptions from equality legislation so they can continue to discriminate against gay people and those who do not share their beliefs; and they will be doing their utmost to defend their 26 unelected members of Parliament when the Government tackles Lords reform this session!�

Andrew Copson, Education Officer at the BHA, said that the result was particularly interesting coming so soon after Government caved in to religious pressure over faith schools: �The government keeps making the mistake of seeing pressure from religious groups as widespread public opinion. Even though poll after poll has demonstrated wide public opposition to faith schools (2), religious groups have fought off all attempts to reduce the harm done by them, and instead have won more privileges and pay scarcely a penny of the costs of �their� schools.�

Claire Rayner, writer, broadcaster and BHA Vice President (and former President) said, �It is such an encouragement that so many of the British public accept the positive values of humanism. I fall over people with just the same views all the time, though they may not call themselves humanists. The local soup run that goes out to the homeless is run by the local churches and synagogues, but when I got involved with them I discovered that at least half of them are �non-believers�. But there is nowhere else they can go if they want to help.

�I was a humanist without knowing it for many years before I found the Association � when I did, it was like finding a sort of home. Here were people with a range of views that matched mine, who shared my respect for life in all its forms and who, above all, did not in any way try to bully other people to follow their beliefs.�

Richard Norman , Emeritus Professor of Moral Philosopher at the University of Kent, author of On Humanism(Routledge), and a Vice President of the BHA said, �What is encouraging about this poll is not just the fact that so many people can thrive without religious belief, but that they are capable of taking a rational and sensitive attitude to moral questions. They recognise that you can do justice to the complexity of moral problems without succumbing to the crude relativism of "it's all a matter of personal preference".�

Baroness Whitaker, a Labour peer and a Vice President of the British Humanist Association said, �Ever since I was at (a Christian) school, I preferred humanism and I joined the BHA not long after I returned from graduate studies in the USA in 1961. As a child I found the religious presentation of sin and virtue uncongenial and as an adult I found the humanist perspective on morality, with its emphasis on reason, persuasive and attractive. It�s heartening to see that, today, so many people feel the same.

�I don�t think that religious beliefs are needed to understand the universe, or to be moral (as even tiny children feel remorse and compunction) � the knowledge that life is finite obliges us to make choices, and our rational nature makes us justify these choices and relate them to each other in a coherent way. This is what creates systems of ethics and values.

�My own humanist values motivate me as a working peer, where I put the case publicly that non-religious worldviews such as humanist ones should be accorded the same status � no more and no less � as religious ones.�

ENDNOTES

(1) 82% of the British public �think that a person who is suffering unbearably from a terminal illness should be allowed by law to receive medical help to die, if that is what they want�� (NOP poll, 2004)

(2) eg 64% opposed the idea of government funding for faith schools, ICM poll 2005; 80% believed all schools should be open to those of any religion or belief, MORI poll 2001; 80% opposed the expansion of faith schools, YouGov poll 2001

Analysis of MORI polls - level of humanist convictions

Analysis of Ipsos MORI polls (released 24/11/06) on the level of humanist convictions amongst the British public and on how many of the British public believe religious groups and leaders are paid too much attention by Government.

Full analysis of the responses is available here (pdf)

Click here for commentary on the polls from BHA staff and Vice Presidents.

Those who choose only Humanist statements � �humanists� by this survey�s definition - are more prevalent among:

- younger and middle-aged people (aged 15-54) (41%) compared to those aged 55 and over (26%)

- those in social classes ABC1 (43%) compared to those in C2DE (28%)

- those with children in their household (43%) compared to those without (33%)

- those that live in the South (41%) compared to those that live in the Midlands (30%), with those in the North in between (37%)

- those working full- or part-time (42%) compared to those not working (29%)

- those who read �broadsheets� (51%) compared to those that read tabloids (33%)

- those with qualifications of GCSE equivalent and above (42%) compared to those with no formal qualifications (20%).

The questions and answers in the poll were as follows:

Respondents were asked: �If you had to choose just one of the statements which one best matches your view?� (The * indicates the humanist option in each case: respondents were not shown the *)

Scientific and other evidence provides the best way to understand the universe.* (62%)
Religious beliefs are needed for a complete understanding of the universe. (22%)
Neither of these (10%)
Don�t know (6%)

Human nature by itself gives us an understanding of what is right and wrong* (62%)
People need religious teachings in order to understand what is right and wrong (27%)
Neither of these (7%)
Don�t know (4%)

What is right and wrong depends on the effects on people and the consequences for society and the world* (65%)
What is right and wrong is basically just a matter of personal preference (15%)

What is right and wrong is unchanging and should never be challenged (13%)
None of these (2%)
Don�t know (5%)

Respondents were asked: �People often comment on the level of attention the Government pays to certain groups in society. Which, if any, of the following groups of people do you think the Government pays too much attention to?� and presented with a list of seven possibilities from which they could select up to three responses. Responses were:

%

Leaders of other countries 44

Religious groups and leaders 42

Newspaper headlines 35

Big Business 34

The Royal Family 20

Trade Unions 17

Ordinary people 3

None of these 9

Respondents were asked: �If you had to choose just one of the statements which one best matches your view?�

This life is the only life we have and death is the end of our personal existence (41%)
When we die we go on and still exist in another way (45%)
Neither of these (5%)
Don�t know (8%)

TECHNICAL NOTE ON DATA COLLECTION

Ipsos MORI interviewed a nationally-representative sample of 975 respondents aged 15+ across Great Britain. Interviews were conducted face-to-face, in respondents� homes, between 26 and 30 October 2006. 175 sampling points were covered. Results are weighted to the national GB 15+ population profile.

42%: Government pays too much attention to ‘religious groups and leaders’

17 Million humanists in Britain!
36% of the population!


42% of the population think the Government pays too much attention to religious groups and leaders!

If you count yourself amongst the rapidly growing number of humanists in Britain, or resent the growing influence of unrepresentative 'faith leaders' on Government policy, please join the British Humanist Association today!

We need your support to represent your views.

The figures above come from a new Mori poll.
Click
here to see the results on humanist beliefs.
Click
here for the results on the influence of religious groups and leaders.


42%: Government pays too much attention to ‘religious groups and leaders’ (24/11/06)

(Numbers in brackets below refer to endnotes)

More people think that the government pays too much attention to ‘religious groups and leaders’ than to any other domestic group according to an Ipsos MORI poll published today.

Asked to select from a list of groups that people might think the government pays too much attention to, more people (42%) chose ‘religious groups and leaders’ than chose any other domestic group. Religious groups and leaders came second only to ‘leaders of other countries’ in a list that also included ‘Newspaper headlines’, ‘Big business’, ‘the Royal family’, ‘Trade Unions’ and lastly ‘Ordinary people’ (see below for full results).

Hanne Stinson, Chief Executive of the British Humanist Association, which commissioned the poll, said that her only surprise was that only 42% felt religion got too much attention from Government, and wondered how much higher this figure would have been if respondents had been able to select more than three options from the seven listed. ‘The other explanation might be a lingering deference to religion that has outlasted mass religious belief. Time and again religious groups get their way against overwhelmingly public opinion. They killed off the Assisted Dying Bill, which 4 out of 5 people supported (1); they have won wide exemptions from equality legislation so they can continue to discriminate against gay people and those who do not share their beliefs; and they will be doing their utmost to defend their 26 unelected members of Parliament when the Government tackles Lords reform this session!’

Andrew Copson, Education Officer at the BHA, said that the result was particularly interesting coming so soon after Government caved in to religious pressure over faith schools: ‘The government keeps making the mistake of seeing pressure from religious groups as widespread public opinion. Even though poll after poll has demonstrated wide public opposition to faith schools (2), religious groups have fought off all attempts to reduce the harm done by them, and instead have won more privileges and pay scarcely a penny of the costs of “their” schools.’

For further commentary on this poll click here , together commentary on the Ipsos MORI poll on the level of humanist convictions amongst the British public .

TECHNICAL NOTE ON DATA COLLECTION

Respondents were asked: ‘People often comment on the level of attention the Government pays to certain groups in society. Which, if any, of the following groups of people do you think the Government pays too much attention to?’ and presented with a list of seven possibilities from which they could select up to three responses. Responses were:

%

Leaders of other countries 44

Religious groups and leaders 42

Newspaper headlines 35

Big Business 34

The Royal Family 20

Trade Unions 17

Ordinary people 3

None of these 9

Ipsos MORI interviewed a nationally-representative sample of 975 respondents aged 15+ across Great Britain. Interviews were conducted face-to-face, in respondents’ homes, between 26 and 30 October 2006. 175 sampling points were covered. Results are weighted to the national GB 15+ population profile.

Full analysis of the poll can be found here , together with analysis of the Ipsos MORI poll on the level of humanist convictions amongst the British public .


ENDNOTES

(1) 82% of the British public ‘think that a person who is suffering unbearably from a terminal illness should be allowed by law to receive medical help to die, if that is what they want…’ (NOP poll, 2004)

(2) eg 64% opposed the idea of government funding for faith schools, ICM poll 2005; 80% believed all schools should be open to those of any religion or belief, MORI poll 2001; 80% opposed the expansion of faith schools, YouGov poll 2001


NOTES TO EDITORS

The British Humanist Association(BHA) represents and supports the non-religious. It is the largest organisation in the UK campaigning for an end to religious privilege and to discrimination based on religion or belief, and for a secular state.

For further comment, contact:

Hanne Stinson (BHA) by email or on 07764 947249

Andrew Copson (BHA) by email or on 07855 380633

John Leaman (Ipsos MORI) by email or on 020 7347 3000

The following distinguished supporters of the British Humanist Association are also available for comment:

Susan Blackmore by email

A C Grayling by email

17,000,000 British Humanists ...

17 Million humanists in Britain!
36% of the population!


42% of the population think the Government pays too much attention to religious groups and leaders!

If you count yourself amongst the rapidly growing number of humanists in Britain, or resent the growing influence of unrepresentative 'faith leaders' on Government policy, please join the British Humanist Association today!

We need your support to represent your views.

The figures above come from a new Mori poll.
Click
here to see the results on humanist beliefs.
Click
here for the results on the influence of religious groups and leaders.


7 million British Humanists (24/11/06)

(Numbers in brackets below refer to endnotes)

In the 2001 census 7 out of 10 people ticked the ‘Christian’ box but, with church attendance now below 7% (1) and under 1 in 3 marriages taking place in church (2), this figure was clearly more about cultural identity than religious belief (3).

Today an Ipsos MORI poll has shown that 36% of people – equivalent to around 17 million adults – are in fact humanists in their basic outlook.

They:

- feel scientific & other evidence provides the best way to understand the universe (rather than feeling that religious beliefs are needed for a ‘complete understanding’)

- believe that ‘right and wrong’ can be explained by human nature alone, and does not necessarily require religious teachings, and

- base their judgments of right and wrong on ‘the effects on people and the consequences for society and the world’.


Humanism is a non-religious ethical outlook on life and these answers summarise its key beliefs (click here for more details on Humanism today)


These are the key figures from the poll (the detailed results and further analysis are given here , along with analysis of the Ipsos MORI poll on how many people believe religious groups and leaders have too much influence on Government ):

- Overall, faced with the choice, 62% said ‘scientific & other evidence provides the best way to understand the universe’ against 22% who felt ‘religious beliefs are needed for a complete understanding of the universe’.

- Similarly, 62% chose ‘Human nature by itself gives us an understanding of what is right and wrong’, against 27% who said ‘People need religious teachings in order to understand what is right and wrong’.

- In the last question, faced with three choices, 65% said that what is right and wrong ‘depends on the effects on people and the consequences for society and the world’. The rest split almost equally between two profoundly un-Humanist views: 15% said right and wrong were ‘basically just a matter of personal preference’ and 13% said what was right and wrong was ‘unchanging and should never be challenged’.

Thirty-six percent chose all three of the Humanist answers, and another 30% chose two out of three. Only 13% chose none of them.


41% believe this is our only life

Another question found that 41% endorsed the strong statement: ‘This life is the only life we have and death is the end of our personal existence’. Fractionally more - 45% - preferred the broad view that ‘when we die we go on and still exist in another way’. Of those choosing all three of the ‘Humanist’ answers, 54% said this was our only life, against 38% who believed in some sort of continued existence. And of those seeing this as our only life, 79% chose two or all three of the ‘Humanist’ answers to the other questions. (Interestingly, 22% of those who endorsed the need for religion in answers to other questions also said this was our only life.)


Commentary (for more click here )

Hanne Stinson, chief executive of the British Humanist Association said, ‘Britain is basically a humanist country, and this poll shows it. We have always been aware that many people who do not identify themselves as humanists, and this includes quite a few people who do not know what Humanism is, live their lives by what one might describe as humanist principles. People who join the Association often tell us that they have been humanists all their lives, or for the last 20 years or so, but didn’t know it. But it is very encouraging to find that 36% of the British population are not simply non-religious, but actually humanist in their outlook and their morality, and that very many others don’t feel they need religion to understand the universe, or to guide their moral decisions. These people may not belong to the Humanist Association, may not have even heard of Humanism, but they share our attitudes and we speak for them in our campaigns.’

For further commentary on the results of the poll from Ms Stinson and from BHA Vice Presidents Claire Rayner, Baroness Whitaker and Richard Norman, along with analysis of the Ipsos MORI poll on how many people believe religious groups and leaders have too much influence on Government , click here


ENDNOTES

(1) Religious Trends 5: 2005/06, table 2.21

(2) 68% of marriages in 2004 were civil ceremonies - National Statistics

(3) For example it was asked in a context of ethnicity and the question was ‘What is your religion?’, rather than ‘Do you have a religion and if so what is it?’


NOTES TO EDITORS

The British Humanist Association(BHA) represents and supports the non-religious. It is the largest organisation in the UK campaigning for an end to religious privilege and to discrimination based on religion or belief, and for a secular state.

For further comment, contact:

Hanne Stinson by email or on 07764 947249

Andrew Copson by email or on 07855 380633

John Leaman (Ipsos MORI) by email or on 020 7347 3000

The following supporters of the British Humanist Association are also available for comment:

Susan Blackmore by email

A C Grayling by email