April 11th 2016
Today’s post is a little off the beaten track and, whilst I did a few things today, I’ll be talking about the little bit of reading and research I did that I believe was most important with small addition at the end which covers how my fiction is progressing.
The research I did was about the four principles above: Humanism, Secularism, Elitism and Egalitarianism. I’ll touch on each topic before posting a quote explaining it and then I’ll give a brief summary on how I feel about it and whether I subscribe to its way of thinking.
Humanism was the first of the four topics I looked into and, whilst it has its roots in societies as early as ancient china, it only entered into the English language in its ‘-ism’ form in the nineteenth century and is derived from the Latin term ‘Humanitas’ and is defined as…
Humanism is a philosophical and ethical stance that emphasizes the value and agency of human beings, individually and collectively, and generally prefers critical thinking and evidence (rationalism, empiricism) over acceptance of dogma or superstition. The meaning of the term humanism has fluctuated according to the successive intellectual movements which have identified with it. Generally, however, humanism refers to a perspective that affirms some notion of human freedom and progress. In modern times, humanist movements are typically aligned with secularism, and today humanism typically refers to a non-theistic life stance centered on human agency and looking to science rather than revelation from a supernatural source to understand the world.
I would absolutely say that I am a Humanism, I absolutely agree with the use of “rationalism” and “empiricism” before all other forms of critical thought, I live a non-theistic lifestyle and I believe in working towards and for human freedom and progress in all things. I am a humanist, as are most of my compatriots.
Secularism was next. Many people think of secularism as ‘almost’ a form of irreligion when, in actuality, it is an ethos for life that is completely apart from religion; it doesn’t argue for or against religion and at its core stands simply to assure the separation of church and state, but there’s more to it than that and here’s why…
Secularism is the principle of the separation of government institutions and persons mandated to represent the state from religious institutions and religious dignitaries. One manifestation of secularism is asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people. Another manifestation of secularism is the view that public activities and decisions, especially political ones, should be uninfluenced by religious beliefs and/or practices.
Once again I am a secularist, I support it in its entirety all of its edicts beliefs align with my own and its place in a liberal mindset led me onto my next topic, Egalitarianism and its antithesis, Elitism.
Egalitarianism and Elitism
The reason these two are together is because they’re conflicting beliefs and, whilst I subscribe to both in some capacity, it’s important for people to make their own decisions on these issues, their use to themselves and to society as a whole, based on wider reading and research.
With that in mind, here is Egalitarianism and Elitism respectively.
Egalitarianism (from Frenchégal, meaning “equal”)—or, rarely, equalitarianism or equalism—is a trend of thought that favors equality for all people. Egalitarian doctrines maintain that all humans are equal in fundamental worth or social status, according to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, the term has two distinct definitions in modern English: either as a political doctrine that all people should be treated as equals and have the same political, economic,social, and civil rights;or as a social philosophy advocating the removal of economic inequalities among people, economic egalitarianism, or the decentralization of power. Some sources define egalitarianism as the point of view that equality reflects the natural state of humanity
Elitism is the belief or attitude that some individuals who form an elite—a select group of people with a certain ancestry, intrinsic quality or worth, high intellect, wealth, specialized training or experience, or other distinctive attributes—are those whose influence or authority is greater than that of others; whose views on a matter are to be taken more seriously or carry more weight; whose views or actions are more likely to be constructive to society as a whole; or whose extraordinary skills, abilities, or wisdom render them especially fit to govern.
Being that these two ideologies are highly contradictory it is difficult for me to reconcile the degree to which I support each; of course I support equality for all people but to a similar extend I believe that some people’s opinions and word should be given a higher level of credence and respect than others. I believe that only those who are educated should lead and that those who contribute, no matter how little, will always be worth more than those who done, thus they should be given the privilege oh having their voice listened too in a greater capacity, but, and I stress this but, only in the field of their expertise of contribution (i.e: A doctor shouldn’t have as much sway as a soldier when discussing military matters and vice versa).
But, of course, like anything it’s up to you and my view on life may not be the same as yours and that’s fine, but that’s what I spent today reading about.
Thank you for reading