If humanism has a relatively small following, one limited mainly to the more educated, that’s likely because humanism explicitly eschews any catechism that might be used by its followers as a kind of tribal shibboleth.

Some people can do without a concrete tribe, even see the idea as dangerous, but let’s face it: most people’s feelings about a “global human community” range from skepticism to dread.

Still, I wouldn’t use that as a refutation of humanism for all time. Currently Americans take themselves to be part of a nation with 330 million fellow citizens, 329,990,000+ of whom they will never meet. Tribal loyalties are pretty elastic and historically contingent, and it’s easy to imagine that given enough time and the right development of legal and economic institutions on planet Earth, that a “global human community” could start to seem obvious and good.

And if that day comes I think the binding power of traditional religions will no longer be an asset, may even be a liability.