CHAPTER XIX

 THE IDEA OF AN INTEGRAL HUMANISM

 TRAN VAN DOAN

INTRODUCTION

The Idea of Humanism and Maritain's Thesis

                The concept of humanism has been both the kerygma and the stigma of modern philosophy. As a kerygma, it replaces theism especially as seen in the so-called philosophy of existence and romanticism.¹ As a stigma, the concept of humanism has been the main cause of more unnecessary controversy. Up to the beginning of this century, the mistake or better yet, the inadequacy of modern humanism has not yet been thoroughly examined. Thus when Jacques Maritain's Problemas espirituales y temporales de nueva cristianidad appeared,² it was greeted with both enthusiasm and bitter attack. This reaction prompted Maritain to revise and republish it in a full French edition. In this work, he proposed the concept of an integral humanism to replace, or more succinctly to supplement the modern but misleading concept of humanism. Whether favorable or unfavorable, these criticisms have greatly contributed to our understanding of the problem of humanism, and the socio-political philosophy of Maritain, one of the most fervent advocates of Christian humanism and of the movement of Christian engagement in the 20th century.³ 

                In this paper, we will not delve into the polemics of Maritain's concept of integral humanism, but attempt to explore the possibility of a transcendent humanism. In other words, we venture to argue for a transcendent humanism by developing Maritain's idea further. We adopt a slight criticism (once developed by Immanuel Kant) to get rid of the mysterious veil wrapping Maritain's integral humanism, on the one hand. On the other, we wish to see whether humanism based on "biological nature," the one claimed by biologists and existentialists, could be tenable. Thirdly, we will examine whether Maritain's concept of integral humanism could, as he claimed, a better, provide more encompassing and more reasonable answer to handicapped materialist humanism. Finally, we will argue the possibility of integral humanism in terms of transcendent humanism.

                Maritain believed that his elaborated concept of humanism could provide an adequate answer to our times, because it successfully eliminates the shortcomings of materialist humanism, and more importantly, because he could produce a rational synthesis between the biological view of life and the religious view of transcendent life. As he noted his synthesis of human integrity is worked out from the Thomist tradition and from modern biology, according to which human beings are of double nature, the transcendent and the biological. Hence, Maritain drew conclusion that a true humanism should not be grounded on a single aspect but on the total aspect of human life. The total aspect consists of both the material and spiritual, the sensuous and rational, the temporal and transcendent. Much more, the transcendent aspect occupies an important place in human life, far more than pure biological or material elements, because it is not a merely an aspect like other aspects, but at the same time is the essence of human life and determines what we call humanity. In this context, one clearly discovers that for Maritain it is the concept of transcendence that is the soul of his integral humanism. Precisely in integral humanism we find Maritain's strength and weakness, his valuable contribution to human kind as well as his utopian humanism.

The Problematics

                According to Maritain, transcendence has to be founded not on human nature in general, but on the nature of Jesus Christ in particular. If nature in general is limited to the single aspect of its biological character, then the nature of Christ consists of two characteristics: the divine and the humane, i.e. the transcendent and the biological. According to Christian belief, Christ is the perfectio absoluta, or the Realisator (Vollendung) of human nature. In the tradition of theology influenced by Hegelianism, Christ is the final synthesis, the absolute, the final Aufhebung.⁴ Christ has restored (back to human beings) the divine nature lost by Adam, our ancestor.

                The point is that Christ is primarily God and only secondarily as man. He is the eternal God before becoming man. He transcends human history. His incarnation is planned a posteriori as willed by God, the father in order to save human beings. In other words, Christ became man to fulfill the mission of restoring the divine nature of human beings once lost due to human sin. Now, a point that Maritain may bypass is that human beings are neither God nor any alter Christus. That means, transcendence is not implicit in human nature, but a divine force given by God. Hence, in order to acquire transcendence, he has to be invited by God (or allowed by God). The grace of God bestowed on man transforms man in the flesh into a transcendent being. In this case, even if man is transcendent, he is so only by divine grace and not by his own nature. Even if we are called by God to be Christian, certainly we are not Christ, but rather followers of Christ (in the sense of imitatio, once accepted by mediaeval theologians).⁵ That means, man is by nature not transcendent.

                Now, the problem is, if man by nature is not transcendent, and if transcendence expresses the divine grace bestowed on him, then Maritain's integral humanism would be founded not on human nature as such, but on divine nature. It is better to say that integral humanism reflects the original human-divine nature of Adam before his fall. And such an integral humanism can be only by means of grace, and not by birth (since man by birth is imperfect due to his original sin). The grace of God is, of course, bestowed on those who believe in Him. Needless to say, Maritain had reiterated the famous motto of credo ut intelligam. Belief in God must be the first and necessary condition for integral humanism. As a consequence, the non-Christian or atheist could never acquire integral humanism, just as the pagan would never be redeemed.

                Precisely because of this reason, integral humanism is not accessible to those who lack divine grace. Here is the main problem of Maritain's integral humanism. First Maritain has to prove that human being is of double nature, the divine and the human. Second, he has to persuade scientists as well as non-Christians of the truth of the so-called original sin. Third, he must prove that the program of salvation is identified to the plan of making the human integral. Needless to say all these questions can be answered only my means of faith. Faith here plays the role of an a priori condition, or a Kantian postulate. Now, such a postulate is rejected outright not only by hard-core atheists like Friedrich Nietzsche⁶ and Jean-Paul Sartre,⁷ but also by scientists and biologists in general.

                By sharing Maritain's idea of an integral humanism, but at the same time, being aware of the controversy of his concept of transcendence, I try to adopt a different approach to understanding transcendence and integral humanism. In our view, transcendence does not necessarily mean an extra power alien to, but implicit in human nature. It is also not the lost power as interpreted by Maritain. It manifests itself dynamically in the human striving toward perfection. In this context, integral humanism expresses the highest degree of human perfection; and the development or progress of human beings demonstrates its reality. We will argue that the fact of human transcendence over animals not only demonstrates the superior human state but, in addition, man as a transcending animal par excellence.⁸ Such a capacity can not be denied even by the hard-core atheists like Nietzsche or Ludwig Feuerbach. All insist on human self-transcendence. Of course, even if Nietzsche's transcendence is not identified with what we have in mind, it still reflects what we call a desire, a thirst and a drive forward to the absolute the perfection, i.e., to an immanent power of transcendence. In Thomistic language, this immanent power of transcendence always exists in us as a potency (in potentia), and is slowly developing (in actu), and being manifested in the form of holiness, beauty and truth.

                If transcendence is understood in this sense, then one has to acknowledge that Maritain's integral humanism based on Christ as the perfect symbol could be problematic. Evidently, his concept of transcendence is grounded on the divine nature, i.e., an external force with regard to human beings. Only when Maritain can prove that human beings are just like Christ, could his thesis of transcendence be accepted. As we know, Christ can transcend himself because He of his divine nature, but as human beings, we cannot. We have to rely on God's grace in order to transcend us. In this context, one may say, transcendence can be possible only in the context of the history of human salvation, and by God's mercy.

Our Thesis

                Of course, we do not deny the divine force and God's work. However, to the non-Christian world, it would be difficult to prove human transcendence from divine intervention. Thus, this paper avoids Maritain's mystical approach as well as his over-emphasis on the so-called vertical horizon of transcendence. The author contends that, one can elaborate a concept of transcendence acceptable to non-believers. Such a concept has to be based on human nature and not anything else. Yet, the main focus of our discussion is human nature as such, and our task is to demonstrate the capacity of transcendence in man.

                We begin first with a general remark that we do not blindly follow the description of human nature of biologists, sociologists or psychologists, even if a great deal of their main tenets are shared by us. In our view, any understanding of man as a social, instinctual and rational animal is correct, but incomplete. One should not be so naive as to restrict human nature in its temporal and spatial aspects. A more complete understanding should be drawn from the most human essential factors, which consist of "what is" (the present, appearing state), "what will be" (the possible state) and "what decides" (the force which stimulates and enables human beings to grow, choose, decide, judge, develop). In this part, we pay more attention to the third aspect of human nature as potential for further development to unlimited and superior stages.⁹ Here, we share the general understanding of human nature in terms of rational evolution defended by Teilhard de Chardin (not simply instinctual evolution), once not fully developed by Darwin. By rational evolution, we understand any evolution guided by the aims: (1) racial survival from extinction and (2) search for ultimate happiness. In the former aim, the best means for survival consists in the act of permanently searching or striving towards self-perfection. Self-perfection is, thus, understood as the most secure stage of human survival. By the latter aim, human evolution is motivated by an unsatiable desire for happiness, eternity or the absolute,¹⁰ which are depicted by the mathematician and philosopher Alfred North Whitehead as the ultimate concerns,¹¹ and by Paul Tillich, one of the most significant theologians of the 20th century, as the Christian God.¹² 

                Our study consists of two main parts: the first is a critical study of Maritain's concept of integral humanism, while the second attempts to explore the possibility of a transcendent humanism. Maritain's integral humanism will be investigated from his critique of atheistic and bourgeois humanism, and from his arguments for Christian, i.e., integral, humanism.¹³ Here, we will examine the validity of his claim by double-checking the rigor of his critique of atheistic and bourgeois humanism. In the second part, we develop Maritain's insight further, and try to study human transcendence not merely from the aspect of grace, freedom and divinity (as did Maritain), but from human survival instinct, from our permanent search for the better, and from the unlimited and unsatiable human desire for absolute happiness.

MARITAIN'S CRITIQUE OF THE RENAISSANCE AND

                THE ENLIGHTENMENT CONCEPT OF HUMANISM

                Maritain's concept of integral humanism could be understood from two angles: (1) his critique of the errors of the concept of humanism of the Renaissance and the Enlightenment and (2) his attempt to incorporate the idea of evolution into the body of Christian theology and philosophy, which, as he openly confessed, is none other than the Thomist concept of transcendent humanism.

                Maritain begins first with an investigation into the inadequacy, one-sidedness and incompleteness of the concept of humanism, which is jealously embraced and "irrationally" defended by humanists and rationalists alike in the Renaissance, Enlightenment and even our age. As his critique embraces a very broad area which cannot be dealt with adequately in a short paper, we have to restrict our study to some frequently mentioned philosophy or philosopher such as bourgeois atheism and Nietzsche.

                The Idea of Pure Humanism.             By pure humanism, Maritain understands a theory which excludes every other not human, in-human or anti-human factors and such elements as the spiritual and transcendent from the general conception of humanity.¹⁴ In this sense, the theory of human nature of the French Encyclopedists, based on pure sensation or on pure reason is pure humanism. Similarly, Feuerbach's anthropocentrism, Nietzsche's super-man, Marx's social man all belong to the same category of pure humanism. In a word, in Maritain's head, any theory which claims the self-sufficiency of man, mere humanness of the denial of transcendence is pure humanism.¹⁵   

                Of course, pure humanism is not a product of modern times. The Greek materialist Democritus previously had attempted to explain everything, including human beings and the human soul from a pure material perspective. The idea of immanentism,¹⁶ the cradle of pure humanism of the Renaissance, has its root in the Homeric myths, as Maritain is well aware.¹⁷ So does the so-called historical materialism.¹⁸  Now, if one digs further into the history of religions, one may surprisingly discover that, the idea of pure humanism has its root in Christianity and in the Jewish tradition. The idea of divine creation, the mystery of incarnation as well as the history of salvation are actually built on the idea of humanity.¹⁹  However, modern times have pushed pure humanism to the extreme by placing human beings before an either-or cross-road: one has to choose God or man.²⁰ It is precisely against this violent either-or dialectic that Maritain launches his holy crusade.

                Under pure humanism, Maritain lists classic, materialist and bourgeois humanism.

                Classic Humanism. Classic humanism insists on the absolute role of man and on his autonomy. Although it does not negate the existence of God, it casts human beings in the role of master. Man has to decide his own destiny. From this conviction, classic humanism exalts the greatness and the beauty of man; it raises discontented voices toward God; and it demands a rehabilitation of the master-role of man.²¹ According to Maritain, classic humanism takes the forms of an absolute humanist theology propagated by Jean-Jacques Rousseau,²² of the "Humanity-God" (Humanité-Dieu) of Auguste Comte,²³ and especially of the conception of redemption immanent in the dialectical process of history, which is widely preached by Hegel and his followers.²⁴

                Of course, Maritain does not cynically discard classic humanism, but praises it for its rediscovery of human values. However, he dislikes its claim to be the pure and absolute foundation of human beings. In a word, he rejects the idea of anthropomorphism,²⁵ the ideology of naturalism and liberalism²⁶ as the foundation of human beings.

                Materialist Humanism. By materialist humanism, Maritain understands a humanism founded on the following principles: first, on an realist and absolute immanentism, such as the theory of Marx;²⁷ second, on a monist and anthropocentric metaphysics. This type of metaphysics considers labor as the essence of man as well as the dynamic of society. In short, this metaphysics is a kind of abstract economics.²⁸ In Maritain's view, the defect of materialist humanism is seen in its one-sided claim of being the final cause, i.e., in its metaphysical foundation based on monism.

                Bourgeois Humanism.        This kind of humanism displays the specific character of the petit bourgeois and liberal bourgeois.²⁹ It is based on an idealist and nominalist metaphysics,³⁰ namely on the apparent and fictitious phenomena. However, in reality, it contradictorily takes the individual subject as the substance of its metaphysics.

                As one may notice, Maritain is very critical of bourgeois humanism, not only because it is centered on anthropocentrism or anti-religious materialism, but because of its irresponsible individualism. This closes the gate towards others, and thereby hinders the development of the human person. Much more, it negates human authenticity and transcendence. In short, Maritain's critique of various sorts of humanism aims to show their one-sided, radical, character and their error with regard human nature. These notions of humanism stand in sharp contrast to Maritain's integral humanism.

MARITAIN'S CONCEPT OF INTEGRAL HUMANISM

                After having demonstrated the inadequacy of classic humanism, Maritain goes on to propose a new concept of humanism, which he proudly calls integral humanism. This basically is constructed on the two characteristics of authenticity and transcendence which he believes to be the most essential aspects of human nature. This section will analyze Maritain's integral humanism from these two essential aspects. Before proceeding with the analysis of these aspects, one has to keep in mind that Maritain is neither a conservative nor a liberal thinker in the strictest sense. As we have mentioned, although Maritain faithfully follows Thomist philosophy and is loyal to the Christian tradition, he simultaneously searches for new scientific knowledge. Like Thomas Aquinas, he believes new scientific discovery is an optimal way to prove the truth once manifested in Revelation. In this context, one easily perceives in Maritain's works his main objective of achieving a new synthesis of tradition and modernity, and certainly for practical purposes. Similarly, we can say that his integral humanism is a dialectical synthesis of classic humanism and Christian humanism, a synthesis which he believes, could be of use for the organization of a better and more human world, i.e., a Christian community. This is the main reason for our selection of these two aspects of authenticity and transcendence in his concept of integral humanism. For as we will argue later, they are not only the most visible in classic and in Christian humanism, but they are the most essential characteristics of the homo integralis, that is, man participating in the work of creation and as free. In this sense, the homo integralis may be able to give a more accurate picture of man as such, and of man as an active and creative being.

                Of course, coming from different cultures and ideologies, and due to our restricted worldview, we may have a different understanding of what Maritain means by authenticity and transcendence. However, even when we disagree with his interpretation of human nature, as well as of the concept of transcendence, one cannot deny his valuable contribution of his integral humanism to humankind.

                The Idea of Authenticity. The Renaissance critique of the Middle Ages consists primarily in its common error of denying human beings creative power (which medieval man assigns solely to God), and, consequently, human value (by affirming the ultra-mondial or extra-terrestrial values). On the one hand, it is true that these critiques have been based on an inadequate and incomplete understanding of the Christian world, and most probably on certain excesses of Medieval theocratic regimes and its structures. However, on the other hand, one cannot forget that the main ideas of the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Enlightenment, and even of Marxism come primarily from this very Christian tradition. The main tenets defended by the Renaissance for example are almost the same tenets once initiated and promoted by the primitive Christian Church. In the Pauline theology and in the Neo-Platonic theology, one notes not only the primacy of man, but also the ardent participation of the Christian in the work of changing the world.³¹ Thus, what the Renaissance demanded and insisted, is almost the same as what the primitive Christian and the later Calvinists have asked: a return back to the most authentic man, namely, to man in his state of innocence and not-yet-alienated world. Of course, this authentic man, according to the Judeo-Christian tradition, comes from God: "So, God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them."³² Thus, the authentic man is both divine and human. He is a part of nature, which may be understood in the Spinozian interpretation of the natura naturans and natura naturata.³³ This means that he shares with God not only His freedom, but the very creative duty which God gave him: "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it. . . ." (Genesis, 1:26)

                Authenticity and Creativity. As creative, one participates into the divine enterprise by means of one's own labor.³⁴ Thus, it is not Karl Marx who invented or discovered the factor of labor in the work of changing the world. Marx inherited this notion from Christian tradition by insisting on the creative function of labor, once forgotten by the Medieval rulers. Furthermore, as a being in flesh with all its weaknesses, man could not change the world by himself only, but by collective labor or by the common activities performed in a community. The earlier Christian community, a fore-runner of a communist community, has been what Maritain considers the proto-type of collectively creative work and mutual responsibility, as well as personalist development.

                Authenticity and Sociality. The authenticity and the creativity of man cannot be thought of without the idea of a social man. The social man thus, is not in opposition to the individual, but rather another aspect of human nature. Both the individual and the social man are inseparable and irreplaceable. A social man without individual essence is, by altering the Kantian expression, "empty" while an individual without social essence is simply "blind." The creative power of man is seen not only in human horizontal development (in the fields of biology and economics), but much more, in the vertical progress, i.e., in the transcendence of human nature (in the fields of mind, morals, aesthetics and spirituality). Hence, human evolution, as an expression of a continued creation, is understood in the sense of both physical development and spiritual and moral progress.

                Socialist Humanism and Integral Humanism. By accepting man in his authentic essence, that is, as homo divinus, Maritain argues that every human effort dedicated to the ideal of the authentic man is on the right path toward integral humanism. Thus, socialist humanism which aims at achieving a world of justice and dignity is a gigantic step forward toward integral humanism. He writes: "Il y a dans l'humanisme socialiste un grand élan vers des vérités qu'on ne saurait négliger sans détriment grave, et qui importent beaucoup à la dignité humaine."³⁵ In another passage, he affirms the value of socialist humanism as follows: "C'était une grande oeuvre que d'instituter le process de la civilisation capitaliste, et d'éveiller, contre des puissance qui ne pardonnent guére, le sens de la justice et le sens de la dignité du travail; il a eu l'initiative de cette oeuvre."³⁶

                Despite this, since socialist humanism has centered on the terrestrial aspects of human beings, it may neglect other aspects of human nature, such as human transcendence. Therefore, though Maritain acknowledges his debt to socialist humanism, he still feels an obligation to make a further dialectical synthesis. His integral humanism is therefore a synthesis of socialist humanism and Christian humanism.³⁷

                The Individual, the Social and the Personalist. One may also understand integral humanism as a personalism. The notion of person which Maritain advocates implies not only a social, but an autonomous man with full freedom, one who, at the same time, is conscious of one's own responsibility. This person is quite different from the bourgeois man. Whereas the bourgeois man feels self-sufficient in himself and believes in his own world,³⁸ the personalist feels his freedom and his responsibility toward others. He is autonomous in the sense of making his own decisions, but this decision is taken for the sake not of his own interests, but of human kind. As such, the personalist who shares the ideal of integral humanism, strives towards the greatness and richness of human kind: "Pour laisser toute discussion ouverte, disons que l'humanisme . . . tend essentiellement à rendre l'homme plus vraiment humain, et à manisfester sa grandeur originelle en le faisant participer à tout ce qui peut l'enrichir dans la nature et dans l'histoire."³⁹

                By doing so, the personalist often sacrifices his own interests. More succinctly, by discovering that his authenticity lies precisely in his transcendence, he attempts to transcend the particular, individual and temporal interests. In this sense, unlike the bourgeois man and opposing bourgeois humanism, the personalist and his integral humanism has the courage to transform the pure human image into the image of God and to accept transcendent values. The personalist is a hero in the sense that he dares to choose to be a new man, free of egoistic interests, and a man of absolute values.⁴⁰ In other words, the personalist is as heroic as his embraced integral humanism is a heroic humanism, which is a "humanisme nourri aux sources héroiques de la sainteté."⁴¹

The Idea of Transcendence in Integral Humanism

                The second essence of integral humanism is transcendence. One has to clarify first the concept of transcendence, which Maritain inherits from the Thomist tradition. He expresses: "J'appelle `transcendantes' toutes les formes de pensée, si diverses qu'elle soient par ailleurs, qui mettent au principle du monde un esprit supérieur à l'homme -- dans l'homme un esprit dont la destinée va au delà du temps, -- et une piété naturelle ou surnaturelle au centre de la vie morale."⁴²

                Maritain's concept of transcendence is much broader than the scholastic concept of transcendence,⁴³ God, which is absolutely beyond the range of all human powers, absolutely unattainable in spite of all connaturality but discloses itself in free self-communication, where the incalculable gratuitousness of grace and the supernatural order brings the movement of human transcendence to its intrinsic limit and the moment of its transformation: strict theological transcendence. See K. Lehman, "Transcendence," in Sacramentum Mundi, vol. 6 (New York: Herder, 1970) pp. 276-277.3 in the sense that he takes "toutes les formes de pensée" regardless of their diversity, and transform them in accordance with the Thomist principle of natural order guided by "un esprit supérieur." Thus, his concept of transcendence consists of 1) the internal force, i.e., the human capacity of going beyond the biological and physical actual state, 2) the external force, i.e. the Transcendent God, or the superior spirit, 3) human consciousness and free choice (in full freedom)⁴⁴ of good and evil. The act of transcendence is seen in his heroic choice of goodness, in his self-overcoming for the sake of the ideal. More concretely, human transcendence is seen in human life as striving towards the absolute, i.e., goodness. This is the human act of achieving permanent growth (development and progress), i.e., the full formation of the person. All these three characteristics are essential and inseparable in the concept of transcendence: "Il demande tout à la fois que l'homme développe les virtualités contenues en lui, ses forces créatrices et la vie de la raison, et travaille à faire des forces du monde physique des instruments de sa liberté."⁴⁵

Ideal Life and Practical Life

                Starting from his conviction of human nature as both divine and human, Maritain conceived human authenticity and transcendence in a concrete way: they are manifested only in the world. Thus, he expressed his integral humanism as a new idea of practical life in a community, a life which embraces the truth of humanity but without worshipping it; a life which is devoted to dignity, fraternity and love; and a life which always strives to transcend towards a full self-realization. He wrote: "Ce nouvel humanisme, sans commune mesure avec l'humanisme bourgeois, et d'autant plus humain qu'il n'adore pas l'homme, mais respecte réellement et effectivement la dignité humaine, et fait droit aux exigences intégrales de la personne, nous le concevons comme orienté vers une réalisation sociale-temporelle de cette attention évangelique à l'humain qui ne doit pas exister seulement dans l'ordre spirituel, mais s'incarner, et vers l'idéal dans une communauté fraternelle."⁴⁶

                This practical humanism is of original quality, in the sense that it is not yet dictated by any ideology, including racist, class-oriented, and culture-biased ideology. That is a humanism based on the common nature of human kind, such as aspiration for the better, the beautiful, the true and the holy. Thus, it is constructed on the common good, mutual love and the self-sacrifice of individual and particular (egoist) interests. An integral humanism is not only a theoretical self-affirmation of human nature as such, but a way of making man more human (not of course in the Nietzschean sense). That is a heroic humanism which chooses the dialectic of transcendence and socialist engagement: the authenticity of human beings lies precisely in its transcendence, and its praxis towards this transcendence: "Ce n'est pas au dynamisme ou à l'impérialisme de la race, de la classe ou de la nation qu'il demande aux hommes de se sacrifier, c'est à une meilleure vie pour leur frères, et au bien concret de la communauté des personnes humaines; c'est à l'humble verité de l'amitié fraternelle à faire passer -- au prix d'un effort constamment difficile, et d'une certaine pauvreté, -- dans l'ordre du social et des structures de la vie commune; c'est par là qu'un tel humanisme est capable de grandir l'homme dans la communion, et c'est par là qu'il ne saurait être qu'un humanisme héroique".⁴⁷

                This passage, which we quote at length, reveals Maritain's integral humanism in its most essential aspects: humanism means not a simple "ritorno all'origine" of the Renaissance, or a blind and radical self-affirmation (as seen in Feuerbach, Niezstche, namely, kind of anthropocentrism) by denying human transcendence. To Maritain, humanism means a conscious acceptance of human nature as both natural and spiritual, individual and social. Humanism means a constant effort of realizing human beings in accordance with their noble nature, i.e., with the double essence, human and divine.

THE POSSIBILITY OF A TRANSCENDENT HUMANISM