Humanist Paradigm of Development

• People adapt and create their social environments;

The humanist paradigm raises questions on what it means to be human, and what might be the essential ingredients for humanist development. Hoksbergen (1986:294) outlines the following propositions, which he argues have become articles of faith:

• The purpose of life is to enhance both individual and collective personality; and

• Historical evolution in both biological and social worlds leads to higher stages of order.

These propositions reflect Cowen & Shenton’s notion of ‘immanent’ development (1995): it is an evolutionary process. ‘Development’ involves both the natural and the social world (thus incorporating both environmental and economic sustainability). Development applies to both individuals and collective social organisation (see Walzer, 1990; Bell, 1993; Etzioni, 1996). Although Hoksbergen does not use the word ‘culture’, its importance is reflected in the ideas of environmental adaptation and creation, and historical evolution. “How may we live?” is the question, and people have found their own answers, for better or for worse, over centuries of history. Sahlins (1997) described “the original affluent society” as one in which human needs were satisfied through a harmonisation of their social structures, cultural beliefs and practice, and their relations with the environment.13

12 _{I might have headed this section ‘Human Development Paradigm’ (see Gasper, 2004,}

arguing for a shift ‘from economism to human development’) or ‘Humanitarian Development Paradigm’ (David, 2004). However, ‘Human Development’ is limited by connotations of psycho-social and biological theories, and ‘Humanitarian’ is a word equated too often in the literature with emergency assistance for natural disasters and conflict situations, as though ‘development’ is quite a different enterprise (see Iriye, 2002; Vaux, 2001; Smillie & Minear, 2004). I have elected the word ‘humanist’ because it represents a philosophy dating back to Greek and Roman times, because it incorporates the idea of immanent development as suggested by

Friedmann (1980) and Cowen & Shenton (1995), based on the social nature of being human. ‘Humanist development’ also captures Fromm’s idea of being more than we have (1978), Esteva’s notion of development as an ‘unfolding’ (1992), and Durkheim’s distinction between organic and mechanistic societies (Nisbet, (1970).

13 _{The negative aspects of a traditional society – oppression of women, genital mutilation,}

slavery, inter-tribal strife – can be noted, yet industrialised societies also have their negative aspects – class discrimination, racism, and ‘social problems’ such as gender-based violence.

Chapter 2 – The Dialectics of Development

- 18 -

David’s definition of ‘humanity’ is founded on “caring, sharing and interdependence, and on constructive relationships” (2004:57). He points to Weltanschuung, a world view common to all major religions and philosophies, found in Christian injunctions to “love thy neighbour as thyself”, to “do unto others as you would be done by”; in Buddhist concepts of Dharma and precepts of compassion (Schober, 1995); in Confucian yin/yang philosophy; and in Islamic principles (Sardar, 1997). The inference here is that humanist values are universal, a question to be addressed in Chapter 3.

Gasper’s criteria for humanist development (2004) include improving opportunities for education, health, social and distributive justice, through peace and security and environmental sustainability. Gender equity, empowerment and participation, capacity building and sustainability are all words writ large in development practice, reflecting a humanist and ‘rights-based’ approach to development (as introduced by Sen (1999), and adopted by Oxfam during the 1990s). Korten (1987) terms this kind of development ‘people-centred’. Sen (1999) refers to processes of change designed to enlarge freedoms and opportunities for human beings to lead valuable and valued lives. And what is valuable in human lives is found in Archbishop Tutu’s definition of Ubuntu, as quoted by Vaux:

We belong in a bundle of life. We say, ‘a person is a person through other people’. It is not ‘I think, therefore I am’. It says rather: ‘I am a human because I belong’. I participate, I share. A person with ubuntu is open and available to others, affirming of others, does not feel threatened that others are able and good. For he or she has a proper self-assurance that comes from knowing that he or she belongs in a greater whole and is diminished when others are humiliated, when others are tortured or oppressed, or treated as if they were less than who they are (2001:15).

The Cartesian reference in this quotation is an interesting exposure of differences in North/South epistemology. Tutu is rejecting Western individualism, and is also highlighting the essential ‘both-and’ principles of communitarianism (see Plant, 1974; Bell, 1993).

Chapter 2 – The Dialectics of Development

- 19 -

At the same time we can note from the Northern sources cited here how the spirit of humanism has been kept alive. Adam Smith was also interested in human well- being, clearly expressed in his Theory of Moral Sentiments, (Giri, 2000; Vaux, 2001; David, 2004). The ‘humanist movement’ of the 1960s and 1970s contributed much to understanding a people-centred development through the literature of psychology (Rogers, 1951; Perls, 1968), industrial psychology (McGregor, 1960), moral philosophy (Buber, 1970; Fromm, 1978), sociology (Freire, 1970; Illich, 1970), and social action (Alinsky, 1971). Writers such as Geertz (1967) and Smelser (1967) promoted the importance of understanding indigenous community cultures in development practice. Primary sources of development ethics (Goulet, 1973; Berger, 1974) were published in this era, and Lissner (1977) presented his extensive study of voluntary development agencies under the title The Politics of Altruism. Clearly, humanist development is multi-faceted and ‘inter-disciplinary’ as Friedmann testifies (1980).

The primary values emerging from this review of the humanist ideas relate to development as follows:

• Human well-being is central to both individuals and the collective, and is dependent on relationships and concern for others;

• Human rights, especially for cross-cutting issues such as gender and equity, sustainable livelihoods and distributive justice are essential for development (Brown, 2000; Therival, 2004);

• There is an interdependence between people, their culture and their environment, and their economic practices; and

• Development is an evolutionary process.14

Thus, the values of the humanist paradigm present a counterpoint to economic development values. There is a dialectical opposition between the two paradigms which is explored in the next section.

14 _{This point begs the question of how economic development can be promoted or}

Chapter 2 – The Dialectics of Development

- 20 -