‘Humanism’: a history of the word

Today, the word ‘humanism’ is widely understood to describe a non-religious worldview. However, it is not unusual to encounter confusion around the terms ‘humanism’ and ‘humanist’ and their application across history. People may ask, ‘Are there many humanisms?’, ‘Who were the first humanists?’, and ‘Did humanism used to be a religious worldview?’ Hopefully we can clear up at least some of the mess.

The word ‘humanism’ has a long history, and its meaning has varied across time and according to the discipline in which it is being applied. Occasionally connections can be drawn between these different uses of the word, but sometimes they are quite independent from each other. In this article we will explore a little of the history of the word, the different ways in which it has been employed, and how these usages connect to its modern meaning to refer to a non-religious worldview.

Humanitas

Both ‘humanism’ and ‘humanist’ have roots in the Latin word humanitas, which was used by Roman thinkers like Cicero to describe a quality of being human, especially in the sense of cultivating virtue, wisdom, and a love of learning. Humanitas was associated with the development of character and intellect through engagement with literature, philosophy, and the arts, acknowledging our connections with, and impact on, other human beings.

Renaissance humanism (14-16th century)

In Renaissance Italy the noun ‘humanist’ (umanisti in Italian) was used to describe those scholars who focused on the studia humanitatis – the ‘studies of humanity’. This included the investigation of ancient languages, grammar, rhetoric, poetry, history, and moral philosophy – in other words, subjects about human culture and experience, rather than the study of the religious or divine. The first use of the noun ‘humanist’ in English in print appears to be in 1589, a translation of umanisti.

Many of these Renaissance humanists (such as Petrarch and Erasmus) were religious, but believed that the study of classical texts could help to enlighten humankind and our understanding of ourselves. This sense of ‘humanist’ as a student of the humanities would over time come to denote a holder of the view that such a curriculum was best guaranteed to develop the human being personally, intellectually, culturally, and socially.

The Enlightenment (17-18th century)

During the Enlightenment, thinkers began to advocate for human reason and science, as well as individual liberties and progress. Religious dogma was challenged and, instead, there was the call for more secular governance and an ethics based on rationality and empirical evidence. Arguments were raised for equalities and human rights. Most of the people who adopted such an outlook were not openly non-religious (declaring oneself to be so was often dangerous), but many, such as Voltaire, Mary Wollstonecraft, and Thomas Paine are often admired by modern humanists and seen as connected to the humanist tradition. However, while the Enlightenment saw the articulation of many humanist goals and aspirations, the word was not used to describe such attitudes at the time.

The 19th century

The first appearances of ‘humanism’ in English in print were in the nineteenth century and were translations of the recent German coinage humanismus. In this period, however, ‘humanism’ could still mean different things to different people.

Some used it to make reference retrospectively to that revival of classical learning in the European Renaissance (‘Renaissance humanism’) and the ongoing tradition of study of the humanities ignited by that revival. However, by now, a second meaning had also arisen independently, and the word ‘humanism’ started to be used more consciously to describe a contemporary non-religious, non-theistic worldview centred on human agency rather than divine authority.

The second half of the nineteenth century saw the formation of humanist organisations, although the word ‘humanist’ was still rarely used to identify them. Many were called ethical societies (Humanists UK began as the Union of Ethical Societies in 1896). Other organisations and individuals with a humanist outlook on life called themselves secularists, rationalists, or freethinkers.

The 20th century

Within academia the use of ‘humanism’ to refer to the Renaissance movement persisted. Outside academia, however, it was as a non-religious worldview that ‘humanism’ became more typically understood. A naturalistic worldview that advocated science and reason as the best means of answering our questions about the world, that promoted freedom and human rights as essential to guarantee flourishing lives, and emphasised empathy and respect as the means of living well together.

In the early and mid‐twentieth century people began deliberately systematising and giving form to this ‘humanism’ in books, journals, speeches, and in the publications and agendas of what became humanist organisations. In 1956, the magazine which had been published as the Literary Guide, was renamed as The Humanist (now New Humanist).  The Ethical Union became the British Humanist Association in 1967. 

What about ‘religious humanism’?

References are sometimes made to ‘religious humanism’. However, it is important to note that this might refer to a number of different things. Some may simply be making reference to those Christian scholars in the Renaissance. Others, however, consider religious ‘humanism’ to represent a human-centred ethics and the promotion of humanitarian principles (such as individual freedom and happiness) within a religious (often Christian) framework – a worldview with some similarities to, but also quite distinct differences from, non-religious humanism. Some argue that instead of thinking about this as an alternative branch of humanism (there being both a religious and a secular kind), it is perhaps better to avoid the label ‘Christian humanism’ for this outlook, and describe it as ‘humanistic Christianity’ (as it is a form of Christianity rather than humanism).

There are also those who use ‘humanism’ to refer to the non-theistic, naturalistic, and ethical outlook shared by modern humanists, but who consider this humanism to be a ‘religion’ – a ‘religion of nature’, or a ‘religion of humanity’. This is to employ a broader, more functional, understanding of the term ‘religion’. Some people turning away from the religion of their upbringing have felt the ongoing need for the communal and ritualistic features of religion, such as congregation and ceremony, although without the spiritual elements or worship. This was particularly popular in the United States. Some early humanist organisations considered themselves to be ‘religious’ in this wider functional sense, and some individuals still think about humanism this way today. This is not a separate religious form of humanism, it just represents a different way of categorising what humanism is.

It is worth also noting that some people may consider themselves to be both religious and humanist if they have a religious sense of identity or cultural belonging (e.g. Jewish or Hindu) but do not hold the associated religious beliefs, and instead have a humanist worldview. Examples include Humanists UK patrons David Baddiel and Paul Sinha.

Connections

Connections can be drawn between the earlier meanings of ‘humanist’ and ‘humanism’ and its more contemporary definition, in particular, the value the Renaissance humanists placed on the study of human beings and human life. However, it is important to recognise that there is no neat linear thread that connects these different uses of the word. Modern humanism is not a descendant of Renaissance humanism or ‘religious humanism’. The histories of non-religious humanism and alternative uses of the word are not one single story.

Humanist thought

While the word ‘humanist’ has only been used relatively recently to describe a non-religious approach to life, the associated beliefs and values have a long and rich history. They were not merely the novel product of recent European thinking. We can find humanist perspectives on understanding the world, ethics, divinities, death, happiness, and organising society as far back as the first millennium BCE in ancient Greece, China, and India. None of the early thinkers who advocated ‘humanist’ responses to life’s big questions, would have used the word ‘humanist’ to describe themselves. However, that is a label that many modern humanists might apply to their ideas and those similar that followed – an alternative to religious responses of the time. This history of ideas, then, (rather than the history of the word ‘humanist’) is the narrative thread from which modern humanism is the outcome.

Summary

• The words ‘humanism’ and ‘humanist’ have been used in different ways throughout our history.
• Sometimes connections can be identified between these usages, but often the word has been used to describe something quite different and separate from the modern understanding of humanism as a non-religious worldview.
• We need to be careful not to think of these different ‘humanisms’ as representing a neat, linear history of some single humanist worldview, one with religious and non-religious branches.
• The word began to be used to describe a non-religious worldview in the nineteenth century, becoming more commonly so in the twentieth. However, many humanist individuals and organisations of the time may have used other words to identify themselves, such as ethicists, rationalists, secularists, or freethinkers.
• While the word in its modern sense has only a relatively recent history, humanist beliefs and values have a long tradition in human thought. It is this history of ideas, rather than the word, that is the well from which modern humanism sprung.

For more information on the history of humanist thought visit Humanist Heritage.

Resources for the classroom can be found here, including our animation. 

Further reading:

• The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Humanism, edited by Andrew Copson and A C Graying
• Humanly Possible: Seven Hundred Years of Humanist Freethinking, Enquiry and Hope by Sarah Bakewell

Click here for more of our articles!