In the first half of the 1940s, the concept of humanism constitutes one of the important debates among the academicians and intellectuals of the period. The publication of articles on the subject of humanism in an important newspaper of the period such as Ulus and in Yücel, one of the most prominent journals of the period, is an indication of this. One of the journals that focuses on the subject of humanism is Adımlar journal, owned by Behice Boran. Behice Boran's Adımlar journal, which had a decisive influence on Turkish political life and the Turkish world of thought, was not excluded from this discussion, and from the second issue of the journal, it received opinions from academicians and intellectuals of the period with the title "Adımlar's Humanism Survey". In this first part of the study, which consists of two articles, the opinions and understandings of humanism in the humanism questionnaire are examined. The responses to the questionnaire in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th issues of the journal constitute the limitation of this article. The 8th issue, in which the humanism debate was finished, was examined in the second article. The descriptive method was used in the study, and the opinions in the journal were tried to be resolved by visiting different texts. The aim of the study is to describe and reveal the main lines of the humanism debates of the period within the framework of the humanism questionnaire. In this context, first of all, a short discussion on the emergence of humanism in Europe was made, and then Turkish humanism thought was interpreted through Ziya Gökalp and M. Fuad Köprülü. Then, information about the journal and its owner Behice Boran was shared and a descriptive analysis was made. The most important finding of the first article is that education and language are important in the establishment of humanistic thought. The identity established between scientific thought and humanism is flawed, and that perception of human beings based entirely on scientific knowledge will create uniformity at certain levels. As an extension of this, the view that the identity established between the understanding of humanism that emerged in the past historical conditions and the present is also an erroneous point of view comes to the fore. The reason for this is that the conditions in today's capitalist society and the conditions in which the idea of humanism emerged is completely different.