Sarah Bakewell amply demonstrated her scholarship in historical research and her storytelling skills in her previous two books: How to Live: Or a Life of Montaigne in One Question and Twenty Attempts at an Answer and At the Existentialist CafĂ©. Those two books made her one of my must-read authors, no matter the subject. Which is how I came to procure a copy of Humanly Possible. I would have gladly added this book to my To-Be-Read pile even without having experienced her writing, as I have been curious about the Humanists, or Freethinkers throughout my spiritual life. The topic had been covered previously in Susan Jacoby’s Freethinker’s: A History of American Secularism. Bakewell’s tome is broader in scope as she delves into 700 years of humanist thoughts and philosophy starting from the earliest western thought rather than just covering the American version of Humanism.
Bakewell
structured her book chronologically, carefully tracking the evolution of
Humanist thoughts from the first stirrings of the human centered belief as a
reaction against reliance on the supernatural. She lays out a step-by-step
evolutionary history of Humanism, tracing the many threads of Humanist thought
throughout western human history. Her exceptional story telling prowess is the
glue that holds the narrative together, as the development and evolution of the
Humanist oeuvre is not only heterogeneous, broad in scope, but also complicated.
This approach could have resulted in overwhelming pedantry, putting the reader
into a rut of repetitious time keeping and list making; but Bakewell’s way with
a narrative saved the book.
Her
ease with the convoluted philosophical developments of Humanism throughout
history and most importantly, her analysis of the developments within their
specific context and in a broader historical sense told a clear story and her
expository rigor made the ideas become as alive as the narrative.
She
started her story with Petrarch and Boccacio and ended with her statement of
her own thoughts regarding the future of Humanism. The last chapter is where
she most clearly expressed her own Humanist beliefs and her struggles with the
realities of Humanism.
In
between the first and last chapters, Bakewell laid out the salient histories
and personalities of the historical figures which kept the ideas of Humanism
alive. She also adds a nice touch in giving the readers a short list and
description of all the historical figures that she will be introducing at the
beginning of each chapter, which gives us a hint of what to expect.
The
stories get more fully fleshed out as the chronology gets closer to the present
time, as expected, but Bakewell clearly lays out the reasons why the historical
figures are considered important to the story, and why they believed in what
they believed in, giving the readers an understanding of the motivation for each historical figure.
Such
historically significant figures as Erasmus, Montaigne, Voltaire, Diderot, Hume,
Paine, Bentham, Wilde, Frederick Douglas, E. F. Forster, Wilhelm Von Humboldt,
John Stuart Mill, Charles Darwin, Thomas Henry Huxley, Robert G Ingersoll,
Bertrand Russell, and Thomas Mann were all mentioned, their contributions to
Humanism analyzed and expounded upon to give depth and breadth to the Humanist
story.
Bakewell
employed a chronological structure to tell the story, which initially felt constraining
and as if the narrative of the early history of Humanism was rushed; to be fair,
there are scant historical records for Bakewell to dig into. It wasn’t until later
in the chronology of the history that the pace of the book settled into a
steady and more attractive pace.
The
chapters on Wilhelm Von Humboldt, John Stuart Mills, and Forster were the most
riveting for me. Although the chapters that dealt with the roles that Erasmus,
Montaigne, Hume, Wilde and Bentham played earlier in the narrative also readily
captured the reader’s attention. The introduction of Darwin and Huxley historically
shook up Humanism much as it did literarily to this book, giving a welcomed dose of
scientific inquiries into what had been a purely philosophical analysis. Robert
Ingersoll was a figure that I had known about but had not read much about, I
was glad that Bakewell gave me a dip into his thoughts.
Bertrand
Russell, as always, played the intellectual elephant in the room as his long-lasting
intellectual legacy dominated the latter conversations about Humanism, as his
long and productive life coupled with his robust intellectual expositions
dominated the conversations about Humanism during the 20th century,
as with many other philosophical discussions.
It
was a bravura work of historical investigation about a complicated and
convoluted subject. My own dips into the Humanism beliefs filled me with hope
for humankind but also left me struggling with contradictions, as any worthy
system of belief should. Bakewell stated that she is dedicated to the Humanist
combination of Freethinking, Inquiry, and Hope as her guiding
principles, and I feel the same way; after all, who in their right minds can
argue with those three principles.
As
with all broad- and broad-minded beliefs, there are enough variations in
beliefs and thought in addition to the copious amount of interpretations to dampen
any hopes of unifying and standardizing the beliefs. As with all beliefs, even
though Humanism has at this time distanced itself from the overtly supernatural
frame of reference; yet humans have always desired a set of written and
definitive principles around which any movement or system of belief can pivot,
which is where the monotheistic religions are advantaged: it is easier to attribute
all the belief to a single supernatural entity than unifying disparate
principles.
Much
as Christians had employed the group sourced King James Bible and the earlier
Council of Nicea, there has been attempts at unifying Humanist principles,
first to counter the blasphemy laws around the world; as having a set of human
based ethics and scruples is seen as a challenge to the churches and religions
as they exist today; and second to integrate all the beliefs that the Humanist
claim to be central to defining Humanism. Bakewell included the Declaration of
Modern Humanism as written by consensus in 2022 by the Humanists International
in the appendix. In and of itself, the declaration is a fine document, it does
indeed encompass much of what most believe Humanism holds to be important.
Although the wordsmithing and qualifying compositions reflect the amount and
characteristics of the compromising that went on behind the scenes when the
declaration was written. While I understand that wordsmithing is necessary and
even critical to the process of gaining acceptance from all the Humanists; it
reflects the nature of the negotiations. Compromising negatively impacts the power
of the system of belief, which then ameliorates the passions of the potential
believers.
This
is what I find to be frustrating with Humanism. A belief system that is as admirable
in its intentions and motivation as Humanism deserves serious consideration as a
belief system, yet the main reason that it so attractive: the humanity focused
belief as opposed to the supernatural belief, handicaps the clarity and unity
of the Humanist philosophy. Being able to focus on the supernatural and having a
centralized power and bureaucratic structure based on the belief of a
monolithic idol creates a unity that is very powerful, even though the truth of
the existence of the idol is dubious.
What
Bakewell accomplished with this book, which is what she excels at, is to give
those curious about Humanist belief a perspective centering history of Humanism.
She also traces the many disparate ideas which form Humanism to those who
originated the thoughts. It is an intellectually pleasing read, an entertaining
tale of how Humanism came to be Humanism.
Much
to Bakewell’s credit, she refused to dictate to the readers, she presented the
historical facts and organized the history cogently so that those who are
curious can read the history of development and evolution of Humanism and then she
allows the reader to decide for themselves. Which is what a great author should
do.
