A language develops in mysterious ways. How it emerges from grunts and groans to the highly complex and intricate web of meaning eludes scientific explanation. Nonetheless, what is known is that it develops within a community and therefore bears the imprint of communal wisdom, a wisdom that is shared and agreed upon by the members of the community.
Built into the English language is a code of ethics. This code has the merit of being produced over a long period of time and through the cooperation of all the members of a community. It is not the brainchild of a single person. It is a phenomenon that owes its intelligibility to a great deal of thought.
We begin with the word “human.” This word designates the species to which man belongs. It is a classification assigned to taxonomy. In itself it has no implication. All men are human and equally so. But man is not a mere being to be classified. He acts, for good or for ill. When we place the prefix “in” before the word “human,” we get “inhuman.” This indicates that in some way, a human can act in a way that is contrary to his nature. In this regard, man is unlike any of the other animals. A lion, for example, cannot be “inlion” nor can a spider be “inspider.” Animals other than humans can only be themselves. They cannot be anything else. Their nature is fixed. A tiger will always be a tiger and always behave “tigerishly,” if we can use that word. When we add the letter “e” to “inhuman,” we intensify it so that acting in an “inhumane” way is more cruel than being “inhuman.” In both cases, however, there is a falling away from being “human” as well as being “humane.”
When we add the letter “e” to “human,” we get “humane.” This indicates that the human is acting and behaving fully in accord with his nature as a human. “Humane” contrasts with “inhumane” as good contrasts with evil. Also, we say, comparatively speaking, that a “humane” person can act as a “humanitarian.” These variants of the word “human” lead us back to the original meaning of being “human.” Thus, the American architect and social critic, Frederick Law Olmsted, can say that “The greatness of humanity is not in being human, but in being humane.”
The consensus of people speaking in the English language is that the word “humane” refers to the inherent capacity of the human being — to be kind and compassionate and to perform good works. In other words, it refers to man’s capacity to be ethical. Here, we speak of a “capacity.” And here is the drama of being human. It is possible for a human to be either “humane” or “inhumane.” His life is subject to the possibility of betraying itself. José Ortega y Gasset has expressed the matter accordingly: “Unlike all other beings in the universe, man is never surely man; on the contrary, being man signifies precisely being always on the point of not being man, being a living problem, and absolute and hazardous adventure . . .”
Being human is fragile, unstable, and precarious. A human can become something other than himself. Our language describes such a being who has fallen away from his humanity in many unflattering terms such as cruel, barbarous, vicious, callous, insensitive, or evil. When man deviates from his humanity, he does not become something better (such as an angel) but always something worse.
The ethical lesson built into the English language (and other languages as well) is that a man should be true to his human nature, and if he is not, his fate will be most regrettable. A human must act in a “humane” manner in order to preserve his humanity. Acting in an “inhumane” way invites disaster.
Humanitarian organizations represent a collectivity of human beings acting in a human way. This represents a high-water mark in being human. Humanitarian efforts go a long way in benefiting other human beings. World Humanitarian Day is “a global celebration of people helping people.” It was formally recognized by the United Nations on Aug. 19, 2024. Valerie Amos, former Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, has stated that “Everyone can be a humanitarian. All it takes is one act to help someone else. That’s the spirit of people helping people.”
A humane person activates his humanness to help others. Consequently, he acts for a good cause. The inhuman person is unconcerned about the good of others and becomes a danger to society. This is the ethics that is indelibly marked in language. Its meaning is evident. Its development arises from the collective contributions of many people over a long period of time. It is, therefore, highly trustworthy. It does not provide enlightenment on specific moral issues. But it does offer a good start by simply stating that we human beings should behave in a way that is consonant with our human nature. It is the basis for stating, as many ethicists have, “Do good and avoid evil.”
There is a great deal of philosophical wisdom contained in language, although it is somewhat hidden. The word “intelligence” derives from the Latin words in and legere meaning to “read into.” Speech comes easy to us. We should take the time to “read into” what we say to discover the true richness and depth of our language.
