Recently, during a discussion on the foundations and principles of Humanism, a participant raised an interesting concern. He suggested that placing too much emphasis on the humanistic aspect of Humanism could, over time, lead to the formation of something resembling a cult. Instead, he proposed that we focus on what he called “Livelism.”
The term caught my attention immediately.
To my knowledge, "Livelism" is not a recognized philosophical school or established ideology. Yet the idea behind it seemed intuitively meaningful. It describes a philosophy centered not on labels, identities, or belief systems, but on the experience of being alive itself. It may point toward living freely, embracing life's possibilities, and avoiding the tendency to become overly attached to any particular worldview, even one as open-minded as Humanism.
While the term was unfamiliar, the concern behind it deserves careful consideration.
History teaches us that virtually any movement can drift toward dogmatism. Religious groups, political movements, and even organizations founded on rational principles are not immune. Whenever people gather around a shared identity, there is a risk that loyalty to the group can become more important than openness to inquiry. Hero worship, unquestioned assumptions, and ideological rigidity can emerge in places where they were never intended.
Humanists would be wise not to ignore this possibility.
At its best, however, Humanism contains safeguards against precisely these dangers. Humanism is not founded on revelation, sacred authority, or unquestionable doctrine. Rather, it encourages critical thinking, evidence-based understanding, and the willingness to revise our views when new information emerges.
Humanism does not prescribe exactly what we must think. Instead, it invites us to reflect on how we think, how we treat one another, and how we can live together ethically in a shared human community.
This distinction is important.
The participant's idea of "Livelism" seems to celebrate vitality, presence, and the richness of lived experience. It suggests that life itself should be at the center of our attention, rather than any abstract system of thought. There is wisdom in that perspective. After all, philosophies exist to serve life, not the other way around.
Yet one might ask whether these values are already woven into Humanism itself.
Humanism seeks human flourishing. It values freedom, reason, compassion, creativity, joy, and personal responsibility. It encourages people to live meaningful lives while respecting the dignity and autonomy of others. In this sense, a philosophy of living fully and consciously does not stand apart from Humanism it may be one of its natural expressions.
The choice is not between Humanism and Livelism.
"Livelism" serves as a useful reminder that Humanism should always remain a living philosophy rather than a fixed identity. It reminds us that no label should become so important that it overshadows the realities of human experience. The measure of any philosophy is not how faithfully it is defended, but how deeply it enriches life.
The real danger, therefore, may not lie in emphasizing the humanistic side of Humanism. The danger lies in forgetting the qualities that make Humanism valuable in the first place: humility, curiosity, openness, and care for others.
When those qualities remain at the center, Humanism is not a cult. It is an ongoing conversation. And conversations, especially the challenging ones, help us refine our ideas, broaden our perspectives, and most importantly, deepen our understanding of what it means to be fully alive.
AUGUST 2026
