In hoeverre houdt humanisme zich bezig met economie en de invloed van
economie? Veel humanisten hebben kritiek op religies, maar wat te
denken van het neo-liberale gedachtegoed?
for those who do not read dutch, a short translation of Gea's question. To
which extent does humanism address economics and its influence? Many a
humanist criticises religion, but what about neo-liberal thought?
I fear that humanism is indeed limited to an idealistic (as opposed to materialist) realm, in that its basic principles do not point to a particular economics. Several Weltanschauungen, ideologies, schools of thought have a humanist core, but this does not prevent them to adopt entirely different analyses.
a (very rudimental) example of liberalism vs marxism may clarify this view. both ideologies have undoubtedly promoted humanism, atheism or even the most fierce anticlericalism. however, both currents of thought came up with diametrically opposed economic analyses and remedies. in doing so, they did not at all betray the fundamentals of humanism, in that every attempt to provide a (alledgedly) scientific analysis (and no analysis will be purported to be to the detriment of humanity) of economic systems fulfills humanism's ambitions. humanism cannot discern wether the materialist or
idealist ontology that respectively underpin marxism and liberalism is
preferable, neither can it provide the answers to the questions raised by economics, as it is not a scientific method but a commitment to a
restricted number of principles.
Therefore, whereas I am convinced that the lifechoices people make are codetermined by the material conditions they live in, this emanates from the adoption of marxist materialism. In a similar vein, my idea that neo-liberalism deteriorates these living conditions and thus feeds obscurantisms, is rooted in the same marxist intellectual tradition, not in humanism itself. How nonsensical it may seem from my point of view, the liberal idea that everyone can freely opt for the lifestance of one's liking does not go against humanism per se.
I fear we have to admit that humanism cannot, by itself, discern the material conditions that affect its popularity. It however stimulates us to look for other factors than godly interventions to explain today's economic imbalances.
Thank you for your thoughts. I agree with you on humanism in the idealism realm and that it can be liberal or 'marxist', but I would like to challenge any one that can scientifically show that the neo-liberal economics that is currently being followed really contributes more to a social just and more equal society and otherwise, so I think neo-liberal policy can be against humanism.
humanism and infrastructure
To which extent does humanism address economics and its influence? Many a humanist criticises religion, but what about neo-liberal thought?
I fear that humanism is indeed limited to an idealistic (as opposed to materialist) realm, in that its basic principles do not point to a particular economics. Several Weltanschauungen, ideologies, schools of thought have a humanist core, but this does not prevent them to adopt entirely different analyses.
a (very rudimental) example of liberalism vs marxism may clarify this view. both ideologies have undoubtedly promoted humanism, atheism or even the most fierce anticlericalism. however, both currents of thought came up with diametrically opposed economic analyses and remedies. in doing so, they did not at all betray the fundamentals of humanism, in that every attempt to provide a (alledgedly) scientific analysis (and no analysis will be purported to be to the detriment of humanity) of economic systems fulfills humanism's ambitions. humanism cannot discern wether the materialist or idealist ontology that respectively underpin marxism and liberalism is preferable, neither can it provide the answers to the questions raised by economics, as it is not a scientific method but a commitment to a restricted number of principles.
Therefore, whereas I am convinced that the lifechoices people make are codetermined by the material conditions they live in, this emanates from the adoption of marxist materialism. In a similar vein, my idea that neo-liberalism deteriorates these living conditions and thus feeds obscurantisms, is rooted in the same marxist intellectual tradition, not in humanism itself. How nonsensical it may seem from my point of view, the liberal idea that everyone can freely opt for the lifestance of one's liking does not go against humanism per se.
I fear we have to admit that humanism cannot, by itself, discern the material conditions that affect its popularity. It however stimulates us to look for other factors than godly interventions to explain today's economic imbalances.
JorisI think that humanism should focus on economy
Dear Joris,
Thank you for your thoughts. I agree with you on humanism in the idealism realm and that it can be liberal or 'marxist', but I would like to challenge any one that can scientifically show that the neo-liberal economics that is currently being followed really contributes more to a social just and more equal society and otherwise, so I think neo-liberal policy can be against humanism.