A group of atheists in Sacramento, California, have prepared 55 billboards for the Christmas season, featuring images of local people and slogans such as “Good without God”, “Doing good is my religion”, or “Believe in yourself”.
This is just one new initiative in the current trend of atheism’s vocal assertion that the future of humanity will be irreligious. The idea that we are in a period of transition has already become widespread in the public consciousness. It is believed that human society, in its continuous evolutionary process, will abandon religious beliefs and that the only recognised god will be the self.
Atheist utopia
In 2012, an Irish psycho-biologist brought back to the attention of the public interested in religious phenomena a hypothesis that is both widespread and controversial: the disappearance of religion. Nigel Barber, author of Why Atheism Will Replace Religion, is convinced that as people’s material situation improves, their willingness to believe in and worship a supernatural being decreases. This is why, he argues, atheism is flourishing in rich countries and will continue to do so until religious people become a minority. In his study, Dr Barber measured a country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP), local prices and Human Development Index (HDI), and concluded that by 2041, a country with a medium level of development will become a secular society.
How does he explain this phenomenon? He believes that when material possessions are sufficient to meet individual needs, people no longer need to place their faith in supernatural influences. Religion will decline not only as people become more affluent, but also as a result of improved quality of life, reduced incidence of serious disease and better education.
Militant atheism also offers an alternative paradise, a perfect society, collective salvation as a result of scientific and technological progress. As early as 1932, Aldous Huxley’s novel Brave New World presented such a utopian world. The events described in the book take place somewhere in London in the year 2540. The perfect society imagined by the author is a kind of paradise built through the development of science and technology. Predictably, in this “new world” there is no place for religion, or, to quote a character in the novel, God has come to manifest Himself as an “absence”.
Why eradicate religion?
For militant atheists, the abandonment of religion is not only an inevitable process, but one that must be accelerated. This is because religion is seen as a “disease”[1] that needs to be cured, or as a drug from which humanity needs to be weaned. Often religion is described in pejorative and caricatural terms, even accused of being the “root of all evil”.[2] In this context, idealistic atheists believe that the eradication of religion would lead to an end of conflict and thus to a better world.
“He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God” (Micah 6:8).
However, this approach is tendentious because it avoids recognising that any religious person who follows the Bible, the Qur’an or any other (at least perceived as) holy book is called to be good. On the other hand, to say that all the world’s conflicts are caused by religion is a simplistic way of seeing the world. The world’s wars were and are economic in nature, even if they are politically supported and fomented by religion. In I Don’t Believe in Atheists, New York Times correspondent Chris Hedges debunks the assumptions of militant atheists (such as Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris or Daniel Dennet) who portray armed conflict as the result of religious ideologies. For example, the writer calls the theory that the wars in the Balkans were caused by religion “ridiculous”. It is true that the Bosnian war (like many others) was fuelled by religious instruments, but the armed conflict was an economic one.
In reality, the main problem with the militant atheist approach is that it presents perverted forms of religion as mainstream. On the other hand, it does not make a clear distinction between religious institutions and religion.
Degraded human nature also makes religious institutions susceptible to corruption, but this does not invalidate religious values.
The “secular religion” alternative
In the context of the vacuum created by the exclusion of (religious) faith, the creation of a “secular religion” is proposed. Alain de Botton is a contemporary thinker, writer (novelist, essayist and journalist) and creator of several television programmes that popularise science and the atheist ideological system. In a TED Talk, de Botton attempts to answer a provocative question: what are the aspects of religion that atheists should embrace? And de Botton argues for a “religion for atheists” (which he calls “Atheism 2.0”) that integrates religious forms and traditions that feed the human need for community, ritual and transcendence.
De Botton’s suggestion has indeed been taken seriously. For example, a group led by “atheist chaplain” Greg Epstein, author of Good Without God, meets regularly on Sundays to try to build a strong secular community at Harvard University, drawing on what he calls the “positive aspects” of religion. At the “services” organised there, various songs are sung, announcements are made and the chaplain, who believes that “not all religions are bad”, delivers a “sermon”. A similar kind of atheist ministry is run by former evangelical pastor Jerry DeWitt. Although he has left the faith, DeWitt is using his pastoral experience to build an atheist-oriented “church”.
A similar secular community in Texas, USA, aims to provide a framework of social support for those who don’t believe in God but want to practice some form of religion. One of the leaders of the Houston Oasis community is Mike Aus, a former Lutheran pastor who is now an atheist. He says he is open to any message about life “as long as no dogmatic claims are made.”[3] This statement is surprising, given that disbelief in God functions as a dogma.
In the context of a society centred on material values, atheistic philosophy may be easier to integrate. But atheistic philosophy cannot function as a definitive solution, because atheism is by definition a denial: it denies the existence of God. And this denial cannot provide the basis for a new way of life, because for a fulfilled life, the individual needs affirmed beliefs and values to be upheld. This explains why this new form of “secular religion” is now emerging. It remains to be seen whether this new manifestation of “secular religiosity” will succeed in satisfying the human need for the transcendent.
The predisposition to be religious
Why are humans religious beings? The popular hypothesis is that religion arose and developed in response to the wants, needs and insecurities of our ancestors. It is believed that harsh living conditions favoured the development of religion, which provided emotional benefits to people overwhelmed by the many hardships of daily life. Today, by contrast, belief in the supernatural is said to be in decline as more ordinary people enjoy a decent standard of living and relative health and financial security.
But psychological studies offer a broader perspective. Humans are wired to be religious. Research led by Bruce Hood,[4] Professor of Psychology at the University of Bristol, shows that we are born with a predisposition to the supernatural and religious. Religion is therefore based on an extremely powerful psychological force that goes beyond the satisfaction of basic needs. A number of studies support this pro-religious design of the human being—paving the way for neurotheology. The human brain not only allows us to have religious experiences, it is fully configured to do so. In other words, the brain has a “religious function” alongside the other traditionally recognised functions: thinking, language (written and spoken), imagination, artistic or scientific ability, and so on. Professor Hood therefore believes that it is futile to try to get people to give up their religious beliefs.
On the one hand, recent discoveries present a serious challenge to militant atheists (such as Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion) who believe that the origins of religious belief lie in poor education and childhood indoctrination. On the other hand, the fact that we are wired to be religious should be the starting point for rediscovering the proper place of the religious phenomenon in human society, however sophisticated or technologically advanced it claims to be.
After all, the human need for the transcendent is also recognised by atheistic ideologies, and this is where the new “secular religion” is born, which simply replaces one form of religiosity with another. However, despite the fact that needs (be they psychological, social or material) cannot be ignored, the main reason for becoming a follower of a religion (be it secular or theistic) is ultimately a matter of faith, not (only) the fulfilment of these needs. From this perspective, atheism is dull and cannot fulfil the needs inherent in human nature. Therefore, it will not attract the masses. This new form of “secular religiosity” may well offer something more, but it will not be a substitute for “true religion”, which many will certainly continue to prefer.
