The Philosophy of Humanism

by Corliss Lamont

Released by Humanist Press in its degenderized eighth edition, this powerful book is the definitive study of the history and growth of the humanist movement in North America. Renowned philosopher and activist Corliss Lamont offers a vigorous argument for humanism and provides an affirmative, intelligent guidebook for shaping a better life in today's complex world.

This version of The Philosophy of Humanism is the Eighth Edition, Revised 1997 (First Printing, April 1997; Second Printing, March 2001) and was prepared by Half-Moon Foundation, Inc.

The Philosophy of Humanism was originally published in 1949 as Humanism as a Philosophy .

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Religion, Atheism, Politics

371 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1949

About the author

American philosopher and Soviet Union apologist.

In 1930s he wrote a book praising the Soviet Union.

In 1936 he started the magazine Marxist Quarterly. In 1937 he endorsed Josef Stalin and the trial outcome of the Moscow trials against Leon Trotsky.

Lamont was a key founder of the National Council of American-Soviet Friendship. He served as its first chairman from 1943 to 1947.

Lamont ran for the U.S. Senate from New York, in 1952 on the American Labor ticket and come in fourth.

In 1959, Lamont became an enthusiastic supporter of Fidel Castro and his revolutionary government in Cuba.

Reviews

[Mike]

I enjoyed this book, and I thought it did a good job of explaining a philosophy that I really knew very little about. If I were to pick one creed to follow, this would probably be about it. Believe in human reasoning and science and don't follow spirituality or superstitions. Live for the here and now, not an afterlife. And do what you can so that we all have the best experience possible in our short and brutal life spans. If I have a criticism, however, it's that Lamont overreaches in what his philosophy has to offer. In much of the book it seemed like he was responding to his critics, and building his case even if the evidence didn't always support it. For instance, does anyone really believe anymore that human reason can lead to a utopia on earth? Doesn't it seem more like at this point that we're going to destroy it, instead? Also, if people are matter just like everything else, and follow scientific laws and are devoid of souls, wouldn't that mean that we don't have free will? How could we judge anyone's actions any more than a volcano exploding or lighting striking? Lamont glosses over these questions, and it's the one part of the book where he seems to ignore the scientific evidence he collects. Besides these issues, however, the book is convincing and makes a strong case that secularism can be both positive and moral.

[Alex]

Must-read for anyone interested in religious studies and philosophy. A primer for the biggest philosophical movement of the 21st century, seeded by the poetic and rational voices of Einstein, Vonnegut, Sagan, C. Clark, Asimov, Hawking, who call back to Epicurus, Aristotle, Hume and Spinoza.

[Patrick Lawrence O'Keeffe]

To read this requires major unratcheting of preconcieved ideas -- a good exercise for any free-thinking person.

[Kevin]

In spite of the somewhat dated science, still a strong and broad propounding of humanism and philosophy and life stance.

[Chas]

I don't know that there exists another book which explains humanism with as much passion and lucidity. I recommend it highly for anyone who wants to understand what humanism is about.

[Steven T.]

This book is well written, well argued, and most of its 300 plus pages are germane and on topic. For these reasons alone, I think it merits four stars. So few scholarly books published these days meet these three criteria.

Still, the book has many shortcomings. First, it would be more aptly titled “The Ideology of Humanism”. For Lamont, humanism is not a search for truth, but a system of thought that purports to be The Truth. Humanism, for him, makes certain dogmatic assumptions about the world or reality, e.g. positivism (the idea that scientific reasoning and knowledge is not only the most important and valuable, but ultimately the only valid type of thought for understanding the world). Second, materialism: the physical world is the only one that exists. There is nothing supernatural: no life after death, no spirits, no soul, no God or gods, just “matter in motion” to quote Hobbes. To dogmatically hold to these assumptions is anti philosophic.

Second, he seems to me to draw unmerited assumptions in his conclusion. For example, he thinks most problems can be solved through education reform. Obviously, he never taught in a public high school. Having done so myself, I can assure you that even the best teachers and most enlightened, progressive, and “humanistic” curriculum, as Lamont understands it, is far more limited in what it can achieve than he thinks.

Still, despite its flaws, I’m largely sympathetic to his goals, a society free of prejudice, poverty, and ignorance.

[Rick]

The author is so convinced of his atheism that his close-mindedness is hard to digest. I went into this book thinking that I have much to learn about humanism, because as an open-minded believer (in God) I think that various schools of thought each have something to offer. But he expresses indirectly that believers like me are subject to fantasies and impossibilities.

There is a good analysis of free will and determinism (pp. 180 - 185), but it ends with a paragraph that does not hold water (p. 185).

In the final chapter he implies that cause(s) of equality and social justice are the province of - and only of - humanists. Nothing could be further from the truth. As a believer (in God) I take issue with such assumption since I also strive for these things, using my spiritual life and understandings to inform my activism.

[Lily R]

This was my most impactful read of 2023 so far.

I read it over the course of a couple months because I wanted to see how my interpretation of the lessons would change with my life experiences.

If searching for timeless fulfillment in a society that’s driven by religious intentions, this is the read for you!

The quotes Lamont uses in his arguments date back centuries and they’re still applicable decades after his own death.

My copy of “the Philosophy of Humanism” has a rainbow of sticky notes. Best 50¢ I’ve ever spent judging a book by its cover.

[Algernon]

A detailed introduction to the evolution of "humanist" philosophy although some of the political theory is problematic. This is in part, by the author's own admission, due to the brevity with which some things are treated, but there are some contradictions for instance in the essay on democracy and humanism, although they don't derail this book so much as present further questions for deliberation.

[Molin]

I really enjoy the book.

[George]

kind of based

[Robert Costic]

A really simplistic overview of philosophy that frequently does disservice to previous philosophers by grossly mischaracterizing them. It states the basic principles of humanism, but it doesn't explore them in any depth.

[Kent]

This is an absolute must read for anyone who is disenfranchised with supernatural worship and looking for a philosophy that embraces democracy within humanity. It's too bad you don't hear more about this viewpoint on life, because it's one of the few that actually makes since. It's a bit idealistic, but it would for sure make the world a better place.

[Muhammad al-Khwarizmi]

Humanism is the replacement of an unwarranted faith in God with an unwarranted faith in humanity.