ACTION. (ME. accion; OFr. action; L. actio, from agere, to do, drive). In the sphere of human relations, every manifestation of intention or expression of interest capable of influencing a given situation. For example, social a. (strikes, public protest, declarations in the mass media), political a. (participation in elections, political demonstrations, negotiations, representation in elected bodies), diplomatic a., military a., etc.

The existence of extreme or diametrically opposed positions does not invalidate the broad gamut of possibilities that constitute a. in general. While anarchists place absolute priority on direct a., Buddhists tend to overvalue passivity.

In one’s personal life, a combination of more or less codified actions called "conduct" or "behavior" can be observed. Humanist psychology (*) discovers in the mental image the outward direction of the consciousness toward the world, and understands this as intentional activity (*intentionality) and not at all as something passive, a simple reflection of the world, or deformed perception.

N.H. postulates: 1) the recognition of freedom of a. within a matrix of situational conditions and responsibility toward oneself and others; 2) the evaluation of ends and forms of a. in relation to their correspondence with the values of humanism.

In conformity with the previous postulates we can speak of the coherence or incoherence of an a.

ACTION FRONT. Organization that unites members of a given social sector in the struggle to defend their interests. Today, grassroots organizations are able to develop thanks to the expansion of different actions fronts considered as "converging diversities" in their objective of producing progressive changes and changes by demonstration effect (*) in the power structure now in effect. In this sense, organized labor cannot confine itself to the limits proposed by the existing system of unions and guilds, removed as these are from the social base, and which are following increasingly tending to take the form of isolated hierarchies. Grassroots labor associations that join together to form autonomous action fronts with multiple ties to other fronts constitute a new form of organization and action that corresponds to the process of destructuring (*) and decentralization that can be observed today in all fields.

ACTIVE NON-VIOLENCE. The strategy for struggle of N.H., which consists of the systematic denunciation of all forms of violence exercised by the System. Also, a tactic for struggle applied in specific situations in which discrimination of any type is occurring.

ADAPTATION. (From adapt: L. ad, to, and aptare, to fit). A characteristic of living beings through which they are able to survive when their environment changes. Compatibility between a structure and its environment. Without entering into the debate concerning the meaning of the terms structure (*) and environment (*), we note in passing that: 1) the progressive development of a structure in interaction with its environment is termed growing a.; 2) in stable a. a structure may remain more or less unchanged, but will tend to destructure (*destructuring) as the environment changes; 3) in decreasing a., the structure tends to become isolated from its environment and, correlatively, the differentiation of its internal elements increases; 4) in cases where non-adaptation occurs, two variants can be observed: a) situations of decreasing a. either through isolation from or deterioration of the environment; and b) situations in which beings overcome the challenge of an environment that has become insufficient for maintaining interactive relationships. Every growing a. leads to a progressive modification of both the structure and its environment and, in that sense, entails the new surpassing the old (*). Finally, in a closed system, both structure and environment become disarticulated. In general terms, N.H. proposes personal and social conduct of growing a., while questioning conformity and non-adaptation.

ADMINISTRATION. (From administer: OE. administren; Fr. administrer; L. administrare; ad, to, and ministrare, to serve). Management, supervision, or direction. Professional activity of establishing objectives and the means to realize them, designing the organization of systems, developing strategies for projects, and managing personnel.

Important distinctions: direct a., through command, and indirect a., through incentives and penalties. Additionally, three styles can be observed: democratic, with the participation of the group; authoritarian, with power held by a single individual; and liberal, which allows compromises and lessens rigidity in the implementation of decisions. These methods are used in different combinations in different systems. The modus operandi of the Armed Forces, businesses, teaching institutions, and social organizations will all differ from each other due to the natures of each of these institutions. In different circumstances and times the methods of a. also change.

No state can function without an administrative apparatus. Any group or institution requires management, the development of goals and means to reach those goals, the mobilization of resources to fulfill them, the expression of the collective will, etc. Without guidance, any system loses its direction. While administrative personnel need to be developed through democratic procedures, their training requires specialization, instruction in appropriate educational institutions, and understanding of and abilities in human social activities.

AGGRESSION. (L. aggressio, from aggredi, to attack). Action and effect of attacking, an act contrary to the rights of another. Armed attack of one nation against another in violation of international law.

A. is expressed not only in the form of physical actions but also in words, gestures, or attitudes (moral a.). Initiating any act of violence (*) is a.

ALIENATION. (Fr. aliénation; L. alienatio, from alienare; alius, another). Distortion in the balance of the factors of individual and social activity in favor of the reification or objectifying of values, and to the detriment of other intangible psychological factors that contribute to the development of the human being. A. is a social phenomenon, but it characterizes the condition of a given personality (*personalism). In this sense it takes on a certain ethical and existential character. A. is manifested in different spheres: economy, politics, culture, daily life. With the continued development of civilization, the horizon of a. has expanded. At the same time, the human being has gained self-understanding, and the horizon of liberty has also increased, although in a contradictory way. In the seventh to fifth centuries BCE in Eurasia and somewhat later in Africa, and in the tenth to the fourteenth centuries in America, human beings began to experience separation from the environment and then from society. Human beings began to understand themselves as persons and to experience themselves as part of a larger humanity. At the same time, this shift, which can be considered the point of departure for individual liberties, has gradually manifested itself as a growing a. of the human being from the natural and sociocultural environment; human beings became alienated from the products of their life activity, and the personality became subordinate to external and alien forces.

In primitive society individuals were closely bound to nature, to their own clan, to the tribe, whereas in contemporary society they suffer acute alienation from the natural environment and find themselves in conflict with the socium, the social body. In urban areas and cities they experience an increasing sense of isolation and loneliness.

As production and trade increased, the products of work grew more and more separated from the persons who produced them; they were appropriated and used by others, even to the point where this came into conflict with the vital needs of the producers themselves. Thus, the capital or property of some became inimical to those from whose work it was derived. At the same time, while the human being in primitive societies was at the mercy of the forces of nature and represented a particular function of the collective or tribe, as the division and productivity of labor increased the human being acquired greater independence, in turn giving rise to the possibility that this independence could even be extended to submerge or overpower the independence of others.

Notwithstanding this, a kind of moral growth took place. Gradually, and accompanied by the establishment of universal standards of conduct, people came to understand the need to restrict manifestations of aggression toward the environment and members of other tribes. Whereas in previous times those captured were killed, later they came to be enslaved and norms were established limiting their exploitation. Eventually there arose a prohibition against the slave trade and slavery, and a growth in the use of paid labor. Work itself, including the physical labor previously considered appropriate only for non-citizens and slaves, came to be promoted as a value and regarded as a healthy manifestation of one’s humanity or as a manifestation of civic dignity.

In politics, with the development of the State and greater complexity in the organization of social life, individuals were more and more overwhelmed by society as a whole, especially through the subjugation of their own freedom and interest to the authority and power of others. As civil society evolved, however, there was also a growth in the strata of citizens participating in one way or another in social and state affairs, in decision-making and the management of society, until the point where today worker ownership (*) of resources and means of production has emerged. The boundaries of democracy, initially narrow, have widened to include the majority of the adult population. Finally, aliens and stateless individuals, formerly deprived of civil rights, have acquired certain nationally and internationally recognized rights.

The development of technology, attesting to the vigor and triumphs of humankind, has increasingly subordinated human beings to machines, changing the rhythm of life and mechanizing many organic functions. Progress in the scientific-technical sphere has brought ever greater control over the forces of nature, providing an unprecedented mobility in space, accelerating the social "tempo," generating an ever-greater number of forms of communication, and even opening the possibility of travel into the cosmos and the creation of artificial environments corresponding to human needs. At the same time, all these achievements have generated new dangers that threaten the very existence of life on Earth.

The development of culture, and especially the increasing flow of information in general, attests to human intellectual progress, but at the same time has been accompanied by an increase in subjective control over individual existence as this existence is subordinated to alien impulses and thoughts. In the sphere of culture and art the human being is moving toward the creation of a new world with characteristics that do not exist in nature. There has been an enormous increase in cultural diversity and dialogue between cultures, but against this broadening of human cultural boundaries we see a dangerous tendency to impose a uniformity, which can lead to the stifling of civilization within a closed system.

The increasing division and specialization of labor, the expansion of markets, and the growth of technology and communications correspond to a general destructuring of earlier institutional forms and modes of social relations, leading as well to changes in collective and personal behavior that threaten our capacity for growing adaptation (*) to new circumstances. The social inertia of institutions and obsolete modes of interaction are of no help in navigating the moment of change through which we are now passing; meanwhile, the demands of progress do not in themselves provide us with any clear direction for development. We experience this predicament as just one of many kinds of alienation now buffeting the gates of civilization. In people these disturbances find expression in growing aggressiveness, neurosis, suicide, etc. The fetishism of social and technological mechanisms occurs to the detriment not only of appropriately human interpersonal relations but of the moral and spiritual improvement of human beings as well.

Power, culture, spiritual life – these are now increasingly concentrated in the hands of narrow elites, so that individuals are placed in a situation of dependence as a consequence of their a. from essential goods and values. The personality (*personalism) becomes an object of manipulation and exploitation, isolation and loneliness grow, and each individual feels increasingly unnecessary, abandoned, and powerless. All of this facilitates the manipulation of the consciousness and conduct of whole peoples. As a consequence, society becomes atomized, and the individual ends up lost and helpless, adrift in an alien and hostile world.

The entire problem thus takes on an unexpected existential character. Neither increasing standards of living nor the socialization of the means of production, neither private property nor its egalitarian distribution, or the development of technology and information, or religion and culture – none of these can stop the expansion of the horizon of a. Only a restructuring of personal consciousness oriented by new values, the development of self- and mutual organization and management, and the humanization of social relations can contribute to reducing the boundaries of a. In this sense, stimulating participation for greater numbers of people can help to minimize social and political a., averting extreme reactions on the part of those human beings who are most lost and desperate.

For the first time in the history of humankind we are beginning to view ourselves as conscious and active agents in the cosmos and to act accordingly, establishing a mutual communication with regions beyond the earth. Within their consciousness human beings are beginning to transcend the constants in nature that limit their possibilities, such as the speed of light, absolute zero, the irreversibility of the arrow of physical time, etc. All of this expands creative capacities and the liberty of the human being, opening the way for the formation of an integrated personality in continuing development.

N.H. sees in a. not so much an economic problem as an existential, vital, and moral problem, and consequently proposes as an objective the reduction of the level of a. as a dangerous condition that deforms the personality. The crisis of contemporary civilization is engendered in large part by the hypertrophy of alteration and violence (*) on one hand, and the search for ways to overcome them, on the other. Humanity aspires to ensure progress in new directions, but without an increase in a. The future will not be lacking in alienating factors, but human beings are capable of acting on society and on themselves in a conscious way and in a chosen direction in order to integrate the external and internal factors of human life. In this sense, N.H. represents an important movement against the danger posed by increasing a.

ALTRUISM. (Fr. altruisme, from It. altrui, of or to others, from L. alter, another). Concern for and happiness at the well-being of others, even at one’s own expense, and out of purely humane motives. Involves service for the good of others and a willingness to sacrifice one’s personal interest for the sake of others.

This term was introduced into scientific and philosophical language by Auguste Comte, who used it in formulating the moral doctrine of Positivism. In the experience of a. Comte saw, moreover, a criterion of experience capable of counteracting not only ordinary selfishness but that selfishness defended by Liberalism as a factor of progress. A., like solidarity (*) and reciprocity (*), are characteristic of the humanist ethic, because these attitudes contribute to the progress of humankind and to the favorable and just resolution of interpersonal and social conflicts.

ANARCHISM. (From anarchy: Gr. anarchia, lack of ruler or government, from anarchos, without chief or ruler; an priv., and archos, ruler). Sociopolitical movement, whose fundamental principle is the negation of the State, which is considered an to be organ of violence (*). In general, a. also rejects private property and religion (*), which it regards as factors that threaten the absolute freedom of the human being.

From the theoretical point of view, a. is eclectic, borrowing from even the most violent formulations, from to Stirner’s anarcho-individualism, Kropotkin’s anarcho-communism, and anarcho-syndicalism, so profoundly influenced by Kropotkin.

Anarcho-syndicalism denies any validity to political struggle or a leading role in the workers movement by any political party, attributing to the anarchist union the highest revolutionary status.

Bakunin maintains that the new order will spring spontaneously from anarchy, a thesis conflicting with that of Proudhon, which conceives the new society as an organization based on exchange of services and reciprocity, involving cooperatives and the principle of self-governance. (*).

Some specialists have seen in Nietzsche an axiological a. and in Tolstoy and Gandhi practical expressions of an ethical, socialist, and non-violent a.

ANTHROPOCENTRIC HUMANISM. (anthropo-, from Gr. anthropos, man, human; and Gr. kentron, center. Humanism, see etymology at human being). A position based on the centrality of the human being and generally excluding any theistic proposal. Additionally, a.h. rejects the domination of one human being by another, replacing those actions with the attempt to control nature, which is defined as the medium over which humanity should exert unrestricted power. There are differences with N.H. in that the latter starts with the centrality of the human being but does not reject theistic positions. Moreover, N.H. considers nature not as a passive medium but as an active force operating in interaction with the human phenomenon. Consequently, the impulse toward individual and social improvement must bear in mind the human impact on nature, something that imposes limitations that are not only moral but must be reflected in legislation, the legal system, and environmental planning.

ANTI-HUMANISM. (See etymology at human being). Any practical and/or theoretical position that tends to support a structure of power based on the anti-values of discrimination (*) and violence (*).

ANTIHUMANIST ATTITUDE. (See etymology at human being). This is not a doctrinal position but a behavior that is in practice the inverted image of the humanist attitude (*). It does not refer to particular situations or to the commission of specific acts that may well be reprehensible from the perspective of humanist ethics. In concrete terms, the a.a. is a personal placement or stance in the world, an "objectivizing" mode of relation characterized by the negation of the intentionality and liberty of other human beings.

ANTIWAR MOVEMENT. (from anti-, pref. Gr. anti, against. War, ME. werre; OHG. werra, confusion, strife, quarrel). Movement against wars in general and any specific war, whether present or future, whether open and declared or clandestine and undeclared. In antiquity, universal religions and ethical systems began to condemn warfare as an institution contrary to divine will and harmful to society in that it corrupts the human being and dissolves society. In the Middle Ages, various popular religious movements had an antiwar component, and gave expression to popular protest, especially among serfs and peasants, against the kind of devastation commonly produced in the warfare between fiefdoms.

The modern international a.m. arose in the nineteenth century and gained strength on the eve of the First World War. At national and international conferences and conventions, antiwar organizations were formed to forestall the outbreak of a world war and to condemn what were called colonial wars that involved the pillaging of less developed countries. These movements forced international diplomacy to develop a series of standards and to approve documents on specific procedures to limit the scope of international conflicts and the effects of military actions on civilian populations, to issue rules for providing medical aid to the wounded and treatment of prisoners of war, etc. In spire of these efforts, the a.m. was not able to prevent either of the two world wars in this century.

Following the Second World War, the a.m. grew larger and put forward the necessity of disarmament, above all the prohibition and elimination of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons, as well as conventional weapons; the dissolving of military blocs and alliances; the closing of military bases on foreign soil and removal of troops. In many ways the a.m. movement achieved its objectives, if only partially. The end of the Cold War caused a crisis for the a.m.

ARMY. (ME. armye, armeye; OFr. armee; It. armata; L. armata, army, fleet; f. of armatus, pp. of armare, to arm; arma, arms). The body of military forces of a state, especially the land forces.

One of the military institutions of the State, which contributes to the external function of defense. However, national States at times utilize the a. not only for the defense of the country but also to attack and subjugate other countries and peoples, i.e., to expand their borders; this is considered a violation of international law (*aggression). Another improper use of the a. consists of employing it to resolve internal conflicts through armed force.

There are countries that do not have armed forces and fulfill their defense needs through other methods.

In some countries, the a. is professional and behaves like a corporation, its members are hired by contract, their duties and rights spelled out in a contract with the State. In other countries, citizens of certain ages are required to perform compulsory military service. There are also mixed systems.

N.H. condemns the use of violence (*) in all its forms, including armed force. However, to achieve the full realization of the principle of non-violence (*) requires appropriate external and internal conditions for eliminating violence from daily life and social practice, national as well as international. In the meantime, to make progress in this direction it is necessary to increasingly limit the use of the a., to democratize its operation and relations with civil society, to ensure that it is under public control, and to discuss fully in the communications media its internal life, its relations, the military budget, and the military doctrine of the State. From the humanist point of view, any intervention by the a. in political life is inadmissible, and military personnel on active duty should not have electoral rights or make public statements concerning state policy. They recover this right upon leaving the military and becoming ordinary citizens.

ATHEISM. (Fr. athéisme, from Gr. atheos, without a god; a without; and theos, god). Literally, negation of divinity. Hence, rejection of religion (*) and negation of any kind of supernatural or unknown powers. Generally, a. rejects the landscapes proposed by religions (heaven, hell, etc.) as well as the existence of psychic entities independent of the body (angels, spirits, etc.).

A. admits various beliefs concerning the origin and functioning of nature, but in all cases excludes the participation of an intelligence, reason, or logos in the development of the Universe.

There is a theoretical a., based on people’s convictions corresponding to the state of development of science at any given moment; there is also an empirical a., which needs no theoretical development or justification. There is sincere a. and superficial a.

Over the course of human development, religion and a. have developed along parallel lines in different cultures. It is also true that devotees of each of these positions have been subjected to persecution and massacres by those of the other faction.

As with any other faith, a. must be protected, as must the right to publicize and teach it, at the same time without subjecting people to any requirement for uniformity or universal conformity to its teaching.

Those who are partisans of N.H. are well-disposed to maintaining an amicable dialogue with adherents of the many forms of a., as well as those of confessions and organizations of religious inspiration, whether social institutions, political parties, unions, etc., with the aim of acting in broad solidarity and cooperation on behalf of the human being and of social progress, freedom, and peace.

AUTHORITARIANISM. (From authority: L. auctoritas, authority, from auctor, originator, author). 1) Irrational faith in and obedience to the person, institution, or social group that is considered the source of authority. 2) Anti-democratic political regime based on the unlimited power of a single person, institution, or social group, which sustains itself through manipulation (*) and violence(*). 3) A form of dogmatism (*) that considers authority the only or supreme source of wisdom or ethics.

N.H. condemns all forms and manifestations of a. as incompatible with the freedom of the individual, and it points out a path and method of struggle for replacing a. through the democratization and modernization of society.top
      |A |B |C |D |E |F |G |H | I |J |K |L |M |N |O |P |Q |R |S |T |U |V |W |X |Y |Z |

We invite everyone to participate with us in putting into practice the moral principle that says: "Treat others as you would like to be treated."
More information:
www.dialogo.org , [email protected] or [email protected]