Characteristics and Criticism of Humanism Philosophical Approach

Introduction

Before proceeding to examine the humanistic approach or humanism, it is important to know that this discipline was developed by geographers such as Yi-Fu Tuan (1974), Anne Buttimer (1976), and Edward Relph (1976, 1981, 1993) who are referred to as ‘humanistic geographers’. They studied and examined place as it plays an integral role in human experiences. Previous studies mostly defined humanism as a genre of geography that emerged as a critique of the knowledge system of logical positivism. Tuan explains humanism as the understanding of the world by studying people’s relations with nature, their geographical behavior, as well as their feelings and ideas regarding space and place. This definition is similar to that found in Johnston (1986), who writes that humanism is a conceptual perspective which claims that a comprehensive understanding of human-environmental relationships must consider individual and group experiences and meanings of space, place, landscape, regions, mobility, and many other related geographic phenomena. Within the context of urban geography, the concept of humanism views human beings individually as purposeful agents that bring about change and development in urban regions.

The Aim and Focus of Humanism

Having defined what is meant by humanism, this paper continues by analyzing its focal point. Humanism is based on understanding social behavior using methodologies that explore people’s subjective experiences in the world they live in. In support of the idea of social behavior, Tuan (1974) conceptualizes that the humanistic approach in geography solemnly accounts for the thoughts and actions human beings portray. In addition, humanism is said to revolve around activities and products that are distinctive to human beings. In a more complex way, this philosophical perspective describes and discloses the complexity and ambiguity presented by relationships occurring between people and the environment they reside in, people and places, and their correlation with Mother Earth, as well as their ideas and feelings contemplating space and place. This approach encourages a deeper exploration of how cultural and personal narratives shape our understanding of geographical spaces.

Example

In support of the humanistic perspective, the relevance of human social relations with the world around them is best explained by a scenario wherein one is walking in a city. Insinuating that one is walking or driving at 58 Steve Biko Street in Potchefstroom to the Mooi River mall, the humanistic approach would not be interested in numerical data or generalized models of land use but would focus on the surrounding smells and sounds, long views and sights, feelings, and experiences obtained while walking down the street. This experiential approach allows for a richer understanding of urban life, emphasizing the emotional and sensory dimensions of spatial experience.

Criticism of the Humanism Approach

So far, this paper has focused on the content within the humanistic geographical approach. The following section will discuss the opposition and critiques directed at it. Humanism has been criticized in more than one way since the 18th century. Critics question the excessive emphasis on the power through which individuals determine their own behavior in the city. A recently published article by Sapkota (2020) casts doubt on the humanistic approach in several ways; qualitative analytic geographers, Marxists, Feminists, and post-structural geographers.

a) Qualitative Geographer’s Criticism

The critics of qualitative geographers were largely centralized along the grounds of the research method that was used by humanistic geographers. Deviating from deductive theory, pre-defined concepts, and measurable validation, questions concerning the certainty and accuracy of their conclusions with regard to comprehension and trustworthiness arise. Critics argue that humanistic methodologies, while rich in detail, may lack the rigor of empirical validation, leading to potential biases in interpretation.

b) Feminist Criticism

In addition to the above critique, humanistic geography was also criticized from a Feminist perspective. The focus was on the conceptual, ideological, and ethical concerns of humanism. This critique was rooted in the grounds that it was essentialist, assuming an unchanging, universal human condition that ignored individual and group diversity which encapsulated gender, social culture, and economic differences. Furthermore, they critique that this approach and all the works entangled with it were authoritative. This was so because it appeared to privilege the interpretive powers of scholarly experts, thereby marginalizing alternative voices and experiences.

c) Marxist Criticism

Humanism in a Marxist perspective was viewed as voluntarist because it uncritically interpreted social life as a function of intentional, willed plans and actions of individuals. Their critiques claimed that humanism places too much weight on autonomous human agency at the expense of entrenched, transparent social structures and power. Additionally, Marxists gave a critical account of how humanism gives little or no attention to the underlying economic and political dynamics shaping places and the everyday lives of people. This critique highlights the need for a more comprehensive analysis that includes socio-economic factors influencing human interactions with space.

Conclusion

In conclusion, while humanism offers a valuable perspective in understanding the nuanced and subjective experiences of individuals in their environments, it is important to consider the critiques it faces. Balancing humanistic insights with empirical data and socio-economic analyses could provide a more holistic understanding of human-environment interactions. Future research could explore integrating humanistic and other geographical approaches to address these critiques and enrich the discourse.

References:

• Johnston, R. J. (1986). The Dictionary of Human Geography. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Sapkota, R. (2020). Critiques of Humanism in Geography. Geographical Review, 110(4), 563-578.
• Tuan, Y.-F. (1974). Topophilia: A Study of Environmental Perceptions, Attitudes, and Values. New York: Columbia University Press.