|WikiProject Philosophy||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
I don't like this
This article seems to outlay an american view of humanism and suggest that it's global. I'm a humanist and certainly don't follow any of the three US based humanist manifestos. Nor do any of my humanist friends in Australia and Ireland. I think better clarification is warranted. 220.127.116.11 23:40, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- The name of this article is "Humanist Manifesto", not "Humanism". It is an article about the Humanist Manifestos, which are the specific things listed. Are there other documents created elsewhere that are specifically referred to as "manifestos"? If so, then they should be included in this article too. If not, then this article is just as it should be.
- Besides this point, I'm wondering what sort of 'humanism' you are referring to that is somehow different from what you call the "American view". While these documents may have been produced in the U.S., they include signators from other nations. In addition, the positions outlined in them seem to be consistent with the beliefs of Humanists in other nations anyway. Are you saying that Australians and Irish people have some other beliefs than Humanists elsewhere? If so, what are they?--Daniel 11:55, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
How could the original Manifesto be published by the AHA in 1933 if they didn't form until 1941?
2ct7 00:51, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
To answer myself - they didn't, so I am changing the article. 2ct7 17:08, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- I think they probably published in 1933 and then the organization was officially founded around that by those folks later.--Daniel 11:55, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
- I don't believe is correct but I don't know enough about the history of the AHA to confirm it. 1933 to 1941 is a long time to claim that the same people were involved in a not officially organized group. 2ct7 01:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Differences Between AHA and the Council for Secular Humanism
While it is true that the CSH is more secular in outlook than the AHA, there are other differences too. To my mind, the most telling difference is one in political outlook. The CSH definitely leans more to the right, especially in economic matters. One of the common themes of the original Humanist Manifestoes was a focus on economic and social justice; this theme is either absent or extremely attenuated in the Manifestoes published by the CSH. Can this be addressed in the article?لقمانLuqman 14:00, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm removing this because it is biased towards an american wievpoint
The effect of public education under Dunphy's view, however, is proof, critics on many sides allege, that government should never control education -- because it will become the "church" of whomever is in power, that we now have a Church of Secular Humanism in our public education system, with all the power of civil government behind it, and that honest secularism will reject such a policy -- just as it rightly rejected mandatory religious control of education. Only with an uncoerced free market of ideas where all sides must contend, it will be said, can we have an honest society. But that requires a free market education, not education with a virtual monopoly control by civil government. Critics also contend that, instead of our current near last among industrial nations, when we had such a free market education system, we had the best educated population in the world -- as per many foreign visitors such as Frenchman Alexis d'Toqueville ca. 1830 writing in his "Democracy in America". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 12:52, 14 March 2011 (UTC)