Thank you Lois for your reply, it is indeed helpful.
I am doing my Master dissertation so I thought I should ask for some views and reading recommendations:
What I am particularly keen on finding is the Epistemic justification of Humanism. I know many humanist and naturalistic epistemologist will not bother to justify for example Karl Popper said:
“I do not believe in justification. This is just one of my main points: I don’t think that our task is to justify – our task is to propose conjectures, and then to be very critical of our own theories. The best of these theories we may publish and then they may be criticized by others. We learn from this mutual criticism, from our mistakes, from seeing new possibilities. But we don’t justify anything. It is a mistaken view to believe that either science or history exists for justification. We like to have all the evidence we can; but even the best evidence will not as a rule justify our more interesting theories. We can never build upon rock. This doesn’t mean that we should believe, or accept, every theory. We should be critical, very critical; and the value of our work will be roughly proportional to the amount of criticism we have put into it before we published it.”
But there are some who would like to justify their knowledge, by logic reason and empirical facts. Anyway i am sure there is not that much article that directly talks about humanistic epistemology, Yet i need to gather all the scattered once that has been written by various philosophers.
Thank you again for the hints it is useful to read the manifestos as they are the core of humanists principles