Basic Orientation
Book1: R-E Living & "Homo Rationalis"
Book2: Humanianity
Explanation Of Introduction
REUEP: A Closer Look
Name And Identity
Belief And Action
Punishment And Revenge
Sex And Violence
Faith, Honesty, And Advocacy
Religious Education, Indoctrination
Humanian Organization
Book3: Mind-Body Problem
Book4: (Future Possible Development)
Child Rearing Issues
Philosophico-Religious Issues
Psycho-Socio-Cultural Issues
The Twelve Articles
Relevant Autobiography


I feel almost apologetic about this choice of name. The religion that I am describing and advocating is, I believe, like no other religion, in that it is rather thoroughly defined, is distinguishable from all other named religions, and yet is not automatically exclusive of any other religion, as I hope to clarify.

So I searched around for a name that would not cause it to be confused with other religions or philosophies, that would be consistent with the nature of the religion, and that would therefore be easily remembered and recognized.

I came across the problem that almost any word that might be appropriate has already been made use of by someone. I even found "Humanianity" to have been used occasionally, as well as "Humanian." But it did seem to me that these words had not become recognized yet by the vast majority of people. So these are the words that I settled on. It should be noted that both are capitalized.

Obviously, there is a certain similarity between the words "Humanianity" and "Christianity." I come from a Christian tradition, and perhaps if I had come from a different religious tradition, or spoke a different language, some other word would have come to mind. I do wish to state that I do not believe there is any special alliance between these two religions, and I do not see Humanianity as being a denomination within Christianity.

In fact, I see Humanianity as having a specific kind of relationship to all of the religions.

All of our religions have been our best efforts to help ourselves and each other to decide how to live life, what is important in life, what our basic values should be.

There are a few basic, observable facts about our religions so far.

Probably all of the religions have some aspects or components that indeed promote the good life. But probably all of the religions have some aspects or components that are less than optimal in this regard. In fact, many religions have been associated with large amounts of PSDED. Therefore, we could probably say of all religions that, with regard to the REUEP, improvement is possible.

In fact, within each religion, I believe we probably could find some difference of opinion among its members with regard to the desirability of certain components of that religion. (When such difference of opinion has become prominent, there has been a tendency for the religion to split into two different religions.) So we could say that within a specific religion, there probably will be variations among the members of that religion with regard to belief about what is most important in that religion.

So we note that there is a tendency within the religions toward change. And when that change is contemplated, it is regarded by some as a possible improvement. And when that change is accomplished, it is regarded by some as an improvement. We can conclude that probably any religion can improve.

We can metaphorically imagine all of the religions around the base of a mountain, gradually moving up the mountain, the upward direction representing improvement. If by improvement we mean more able to be consistent with the REUEP, then we can consider the top of the mountain to be the maximal attainment of the REUEP, and we could imagine that as the individual religions are improving, they are becoming more like Humanianity, perhaps represented by the top of the mountain. In other words, Humanianity includes the effort to make our religious traditions increasingly consistent with the REUEP.

In this manner, we can look at all of the religions as being religious traditions within Humanianity. Humanianity does not manifest itself in those people who behave 100% consistently with the REUEP. Humanianity manifests itself in those people who are striving to do so. Therefore, an individual in one of the current religious traditions, a member of that religion, certainly can also be Humanian.

Therefore, you can maintain your membership within your own religion and still be Humanian. There is no need to leave your religion. In fact, helping your religion up the mountain from within would be much preferable to leaving it, unless your religion, in your way of looking at it, is hopelessly committed to that which predictably will cause PSDED.

So you can be a Christian Humanian, a Buddhist Humanian, a Jewish Humanian, an Islamic Humanian, a Hindu Humanian, an agnostic Humanian, an atheistic Humanian, a humanistic Humanian, an existentialist Humanian, or an undecided Humanian. Or you can just be a Humanian.

I see no reason why you cannot be a Humanian Christian, a Humanian Buddhist….

Humanianity is a religion that looks for the good everywhere and attempts to promote it. That good which we already have can and should be improved, rather than destroyed and replaced.

Humanianity is not currently an organization. Hopefully, Humanianity will become an association, in that we accomplish the most by working together. Perhaps in the future it will also become organized. I do not see an absolute necessity for organization, though it could turn out that such an organization would be helpful in promoting the spread and development of Humanianity.

Humanianity will grow and develop in individuals like you and me, but perhaps in different ways because of our different educational backgrounds, interests, subcultures, capabilities, and religions.

And because of these differences, Humanians will help each other to grow.

But before jumping on the bandwagon, let's be sure that you understand the enormous implications for you of becoming a Humanian.