To me Humanism is a collective appreciation of the spectrum of the human condition. Like saying I love Rainbows instead of saying I love Red, Blue, and Green, ECT... And my understanding of the ideology behind that mindset is that as a collective, we have the responsibility for caring for each other and the world that we were gifted, including all other species on our planet.

Humanism to me means: unless evidence has proven otherwise or until evidence proves otherwise, everything defined for humans has been defined by humans.

The only greater power in the universe is the laws of physics which humans depend upon and are also unquestionably and unconditionally subject to.

That we are our brothers keepers, so to speak

As an avid primatist I deeply resent the human-supremacy implications of humanism.

Just trying to ship along with it all and not get too despairing about the things I can't change but enjoy the trip

The newest term for people who want to feel different and need a label to justify it. We used to call "humanists" "not assholes" but now that's not good enough and we need a new term so humanists can ask me why I don't call myself a "humanist" and argue over something else that's irrelevant.

Why do we have to have a label and/or redundant definition for everything?

Not a damned thing. Just another useless philosophy.

This question sometimes stumps me. First off, I don't believe in any god, so I define myself as an atheist. I'm science driven. I always thought myself to be a humanist but by definition, (from this site and others), it's the rejection of supernaturalism. The definition of supernatural seems very wide range to me, and includes things of a paranormal nature. This is where I differ. I think humans are connected to each other and the universe in ways we have yet to truly understand and I have had personal experiences with paranormal activity so by definition, I should not be a humanist. So I stand unsure of how I feel about humanism. A very anti-climatic answer lol.

This sums it up nicely, so when folks ask me what is Humanism, I can just hand them this card.

You seem to have a distorted view of what humans are. The average human has only an I.Q. of 100...think smart as a box of rocks. Inasmuch as it is arguable the species should be judged by the average (mode) and not by the exceptions, the human species is not so "wondrous" but merely another petty, quarrelsome, fece flinging primate...unless of course, you believe that humans are made in the image of God. But, that begs the question: Is that the best God could do?

It means trying our hardest everyday to be the best example of our species we can be, getting better and better along the way. And that includes helping every other species we can in the process.

Unfortunately, my take on Humanism has changed with aging. I have come to see too much inhumanity in humans. These are facts: the rampant greed and how it rules the world: ignoring climate change, torturing livestock animals, poisoning our soil with GMO's and hugely dangerous pesticides,increasing poverty, the advent of Trump by all his supporters, the rise of the Alt Right, the tyranny of religions with beheadings and political influences in the name of God, becoming educated (our best hope) is too expensive. My world is the high art of music - classical and popular. I have been close to deep, spiritual, honest people both in my marriage (My husband was in Who's Who, a world renowned man of science.) and in musical circles. In that I have been most fortunate. I have also, at other times, been drowned in an atmosphere of negativity and jealousy. So I have experienced both influences. I have known people who were associated with Albert Schweitzer and that ilk. So I recognize that humans are capable of all extremes. The question is, with climate disaster around the corner, which wave will win out. Will the best of humanity have time to prevail with those wondrous possibilities?

I don't like the term humanism. It's too species centric for me and makes me feel itchy.