Wen Ding: The Disciplinary Development and Path of Scientific Atheism
Wen Ding: Discipline Building and the Path of Scientific Atheism — Speech at the 2011 Annual Academic Conference of the Chinese Association for Atheism
I. The Current Situation: Good, but the Road is Long. Why?
It has been over 30 years since the Chinese Association for Atheism was founded, and the journal Science and Atheism (Kexue yu Wuoshenlun) has been in publication for 12 years. If asked about our current state, I personally believe it is quite good, yet the road ahead remains extremely long.
I say "good" because the Central Committee has never withdrawn its support for atheism. In recent years, the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) has increased its backing for atheistic research, particularly through the establishment of professional research offices and centers with dedicated personnel quotas. Although there are currently only three colleagues in these positions, it represents a leap from non-existence to existence.
I say the "road is long" because the resistance and obstacles along the way are extraordinarily numerous and stubborn. Tales of ghosts and gods have existed in China since ancient times, yet voices of opposition—theories on the mortality of the soul [1], the non-existence of ghosts, and the critique of falsehood—have persisted throughout every dynasty. In early modern times especially, there was almost no room for theism to operate in broad daylight. During the early Republican period, "Spiritualism" [2] enjoyed a brief period of arrogance, suggesting that "if the doctrine of ghosts and gods is not spread, the life of the nation will be shortened." The pioneers of the May Fourth Movement immediately struck back with a direct blow. Later, when Christianity attempted to hold an international conference at Tsinghua School, it triggered the passionate rise of the "Anti-Christian Movement" and the "Anti-Religion Movement," which swept across the country. From the Opium War to the thirty years following the founding of New China, theism never occupied a place in mainstream public opinion.
However, since the emergence of "special functions" [3], the shadows of miracles and ghosts have frequently flickered among officials, civilians, and intellectuals in both urban and rural areas. This eventually culminated in the frenzy of several cults, forcing the use of state laws to resolve the issue, though the harmful effects persist. Where did the scientists go? Where did the philosophers go? Where did the big-name scholars and experts go? Since then, the "religion fever" has taken on new forms. One is to use "orthodox religion" to resist cults; another is to use "indigenous religion" to resist "foreign religion." Most absurd of all is the attempt to use theism to save the morality of the world, stop moral decline, and build a harmonious society. Externally, this is used to demonstrate that our religious freedom exceeds that of the West—even our national education system and state research institutions are open to religion. Is this possible in the West? Now, there are even demands for the Communist Party to open itself to religion.
II. Where Does the Resistance Come From?
This macro-environment has caused a distortion in both values and the perception of talent. For example, a group of intellectuals trained in foreign theology have occupied national resources and discourse platforms in "religious studies" and "religious culture." They are followed by a group of parrots—officials, professors, and experts—forming a strange alliance. They share a common voice: that atheism is responsible for many evils and must not be tolerated. They publicly list three major crimes: first, that it is a remnant of the Cultural Revolution and Ultra-Leftist thought; second, that it opposes the policy of freedom of religious belief and the national Constitution; third, that it creates ethnic conflict and undermines social stability. With so many political labels, combined with countless literary ambushes, external-internal collaboration, top-down integration, and the interplay between power and the pen—how much space is left for atheism to operate? I should note here that this force targets not only atheism but is also currently working to divide and isolate the patriotic churches.
Through my daily academic activities, I have felt that the Central Committee has always maintained an attitude of support for atheism, requesting the strengthening of atheistic propaganda and research, and including it in long-term strategic planning. The documents issued by relevant departments—from the six ministries to the five bureaus—speak very well and the measures are quite appropriate, providing us with bursts of encouragement and confidence. Regrettably, these documents have likely been locked away in cabinets due to "secrecy"; at any rate, I have not read them. I think the Party and the state work very hard to establish so many administrative units and issue so many documents, but if they are kept secret from the public and cannot be implemented, what is the point of writing and issuing them? It was only around early 2011 that I learned that the Education Law, passed by the National People's Congress and promulgated by Presidential Order in 1995, explicitly stipulates that "the state implements the separation of education and religion." Xinjiang Normal University began implementing this systematically shortly after its promulgation, yet I was so legally illiterate as to be ignorant of it. It is truly embarrassing. But what about the leaders of our higher education institutions and the heads of state research institutions? Are they also this "legally illiterate," or do they simply hold the law in contempt? Why do those responsible for the schools and units they manage—more precisely, those entrusted by the state—hire foreign theologians?
Everything can be marketized, but humans must not become commodities. The soul, the national soul, and the ethnic soul are not for sale. Money can reach the gods, so many scholars and experts rely on "the gods" to make a fortune. Who is the wealthiest today? Once the printing press starts, hundreds of billions of dollars flow out; besides being used for war, it is used for proselytizing. Consequently, there are literati who live parasitically off war and religion. Historically, it was said that "literati have no integrity" [4], but today the behavior of certain literati borders on the shameless. For the sake of a little foreign money, they treat their fellow countrymen as mentally disabled; some countrymen, blinded by greed, open markets for these "foreign slaves." Furthermore, there is an even more important category of people: they do not believe in religion and even call themselves atheistic Marxists, yet they desperately cheer for theism while attempting to criticize and discredit atheism—especially scientific atheism—to the point of "stepping on it and never letting it rise again" [5]. These are not isolated cases; they are widely present among the "experts" honored by the authorities.
Under such conditions, it is a remarkable feat that scientific atheism has survived, can hold such a large-scale annual meeting, and produce hundreds of thousands of words in research papers.
III. Confidence and Truth
Both money and power are good things; they are both tempting and intimidating. Consequently, some of our colleagues have become passive and a bit pessimistic. Without money or influence, obtaining research grants, publishing books, or earning professional titles is extremely difficult. Dealing with issues regarding children, wives, housing, and cars is a reality. Anyone who does not face these problems is not a materialist. Yet, I believe we have much to be proud of: we speak the truth, we do not deceive ourselves, and we certainly do not deceive others. We possess the truth and dare to uphold it, and truth cannot be refuted. Do ghosts and gods exist? Given the current development of science, even some theologians dare not affirm their existence (though they also dare not deny it), so academic theology avoids direct answers. Most "cultural apologists" and those who "eat from religion" [6] adopt this attitude. They rack their brains to abstract religion into "culture," using culture to make people forget or fade out the system of ghosts and gods, while concealing the core of religious belief. In the name of culture, they perform social, moral, and even political functions that religion should not perform. However, if religion lacks ghosts and gods, its notions of "transcendence," "sacredness," and "mystery" become redundant, and its followers lose the object of their faith entirely. In short, religion would no longer be religion, but at most an ordinary social organization. This is the paradox some intellectuals face regarding religious issues.
Scientific atheism, however, dares to affirm that ghosts, gods, and the "other world" do not exist. Theism has no factual basis that can withstand scrutiny; none of its rational proofs can be established. What remains are "witnessings" and religious experiences, but these happen to be the subjects of study for abnormal psychology and brain science. That is to say, the non-existence of ghosts and gods is an ironclad fact. Affirming this fact is the truth and reflects correct understanding. Ghosts, gods, and their worlds did not exist in the past, do not exist now, and will certainly not exist in the future. Labor created man and the world; the production of material wealth and the reproduction of humans themselves guarantee the movement of society and promote the development of history, while constantly improving people's livelihoods and bringing well-being. No one in this world relies on the gifts of ghosts or gods for their livelihood; expecting "meat pies to fall from the sky" is a delusion. Therefore, we place our hopes on "rejuvenating the nation through science and education" and relying on labor and creation.
Yet, why—while the whole nation is committed to science, education, and building a moderately prosperous society—does theism strike us in wave after wave? Besides external causes, I think it may be related to the situation since the Reform and Opening-up. The shift from "politics in command" to economic construction as the center, from a planned economy to a market economy, and from relative isolation to opening the doors has brought earth-shattering changes to the economic base, social relations, superstructure, ideology, and even values and moral standards. After more than 30 years, many major questions still await answers. Within the scope of our discussion, at least two trends among cadres and intellectuals are noteworthy: one is the "Revolutionary Repentance School." This person regrets the path he took and denies everything from the past. Obsessed with longevity and immortality, he casts aside the materialism and atheism he once taught others and becomes keen on mysticism. This is likely why "special functions" became popular. The other school has lost confidence in today’s governing line. However, they still value governance, so they seek help or salvation from religion. Their theoretical representative is the famous article "The Marxist View of Religion Should Advance with the Times." The crux of this article is to reinterpret the rulling party not as "serving the people," but as "rulers of the people": claiming that humans retain animalistic traits and treating them with "humanity" will not work, so one must use ghosts and gods to scare them into behaving. Curiously, this article was praised by certain religious believers. Some among them, perhaps having done something against their conscience and harboring fear, go to pray to gods and Buddha to comfort themselves while deceiving others. This has formed a trend of thought that regards religion as the fundamental strategy for maintaining social harmony. Unfortunately, the religious terrorists of "Tibetan Independence" and "Xinjiang Independence," as well as anti-China Christian forces, do not show them any "face" [7], so they return to using "indigenous religion" to counterbalance "foreign religion."
None of these advocates for mysticism and religion have seriously discussed science education, serving the people, or being responsible to the people. Instead, they attack science and show particular enthusiasm for introducing religion into schools. They shift mainstream public opinion away from sending cultural knowledge, science, and technology to the masses, or popularizing education to improve the nation’s cultural and scientific quality. Instead, they beautify ghosts and gods, vilify science, confuse education, and deceive the people, resulting in a confusion of right and wrong, good and evil. They exaggerate the "public nature" of social moral decline and reduce severe realistic problems to a lack of religious belief. What kind of social interests do they represent? This requires observation and analysis.
IV. The building of the discipline of atheism is a necessity of the current situation, a call of the times, and should be a long-term strategic layout.
We should increase our efforts, combine our work with the construction and defense of Socialist Core Values, and unite all scholars in the country who are committed to this cause to struggle together. We must strive to write targeted and substantial works in a relatively short period, at least to clear up current ideological confusion.
Web Editor: Jia Fei