Du Jiwen: Scientific Atheism and Its Social Responsibilities (Part I)
In recent decades, atheism has suffered from a poor reputation, and scientific atheism has been repeatedly subjected to attacks that often carry a tone of political animosity—attacks coming not from religious circles, but from certain figures in academia and even the political sphere. Taking the opportunity of the China Atheism Society annual conference held here in Xinjiang, I would like to discuss this issue. I hope experts and scholars will offer their corrections if my remarks are misplaced.
Critics enumerate roughly three "crimes" of atheism: first, that it is a legacy of the "Ultra-Left" during the Cultural Revolution; second, that it undermines social harmony; and third, that it opposes the policy of freedom of religious belief. While each of these charges could be politically fatal, this article does not intend to respond from the perspective of clearing one’s name. This is because the logic behind such accusations implies a lack of relevant knowledge and a habitual mindset of using "political hats" [1] to suppress dissenting opinions. In academic discussion, both are negative factors that corrupt the scholarly atmosphere and should be avoided. As for those scholars who claim to study the Marxist view of religion yet treat atheism as an irreconcilable enemy, their position is even more worthy of scrutiny.
I. Atheism is a Product of the Awakening of Labor and Humanity; It is a Fruit of Human Civilization and Reflection
First, we must clarify what atheism is. As the name implies, atheism is to seek truth from facts; it holds that gods, ghosts, heaven, hell, and any other supernatural forces do not actually exist in the world, and that the destiny of humanity rests in human hands. This is a fact and a truth—should it not be spoken, or is it forbidden to be spoken?
Some scholars claim that atheism lacks "erudition" and that only the ignorant speak of it. There is a certain logic to this statement, for atheism merely states a very simple fact. Conversely, theism must be "erudite," because it must describe something that does not exist as if it does, and further frame it as a sacred authority to which the masses should submit. Without "erudition," it truly could not function. For instance, how many articles and books have been published to demonstrate the existence of God (via ontological, cosmological, or teleological arguments)? How many treatises describe the attributes of God (Truth, Goodness, Beauty, Love, omniscience, omnipotence, etc.)? Furthermore, how many publications explain the relationship between God and man (the Trinity, original sin and redemption, and the idea that believers go to heaven while non-believers go to hell), particularly concerning God's relationship to society—including politics, science, ethics, and values? From the West to China, from ancient times to the present, several libraries likely could not hold them all. Yet everyone is clear: this branch of learning is called "theology." To prevent the public from shunning God, it is now often beautified with the name "Religious Studies" or "Academic Theology," and has reportedly become a "prominent school" [2] within contemporary Chinese academic circles.
Why do I say there is logic in the claim that atheists lack erudition? Many scholars today scramble to assert that the birth of religion is almost coeval with human civilization, using this to argue that theism’s long history makes it a "treasure" that must not be touched. But what of atheism? Labor created man; the process by which humans diverged from animals to become human began with labor—the ability to create and use tools. Accordingly, once labor became the guarantee and driver of human survival and development, it simultaneously implied a negation of the divine creation of man and the world. This marked the emergence of atheism; productive labor thus became the first proof for the validity of atheism. Furthermore, the fact that men and women fall in love and procreate to continue the species serves as another proof that atheism stems from human nature itself. "Appetite and lust are nature" [3]; human nature itself binds atheism firmly to the depths of life, and no one can escape it. All three of the world's major religions have ascetic doctrines because it is precisely "appetite and lust" that create the original obstacles to religious faith—consequently, no religion has ever implemented asceticism thoroughly. Recently, the Catholic Pope encountered great trouble; due to his concealment and protection of clergy involved in child abuse scandals, atheists in Britain campaigned to publicly prosecute him for "crimes against humanity." Such pedophilia is one of the evil fruits of ascetic doctrines violating human nature. Reading the masterpiece The Decameron or watching the film The Hunchback of Notre Dame provides a more vivid impression of this situation. More intuitively, the moment an infant is born, his or her little mouth seeks the mother’s milk rather than seeking divine grace; this is the most perceptible phenomenon of daily life. Thus, no theoretical demonstration or erudition is required: as long as one is of sound mind, no one waits for "meat pies to fall from the sky" [4], nor does any virgin conceive without insemination or rely on Guanyin [5] to place a child in her womb. In this regard, everyone is an atheist; we call this spontaneous or instinctive atheism. It exists in every secular sphere of life and persists throughout a person's entire life.
Seen in this light, religion is not an inherent human need; theism is a burden and a shackle placed upon humanity after the fact. The question is: is its basis real? Is its existence rational? How was this irrational thing, lacking an objective basis, produced and forced upon people such that they accepted it voluntarily or by necessity? These questions require answers, and thus "conscious atheism"—atheism directed against and in opposition to theism—was born. The mission of conscious atheism is to expose and critique the absurdity of theism, refute theological fallacies, explain the origins of religious belief in ghosts and gods, and chart the path to overcoming theism. It can be said that it emerged the very day religion was born. The history of conscious atheism is synchronous with the history of the formation and development of religion. In this sense, atheism is a vast field of learning; it must refute all doctrines of ghosts and gods and reveal the history and functions of their many organizational forms. Simultaneously, it must elucidate the scientific and philosophical foundations and the basis in human practice for atheism, and even demonstrate the characteristics of atheistic and non-religious modes of thinking and living. Therefore, its scope is far broader than that of theology, and its thought has greater depth. The Encyclopædia Britannica defines atheism as a product of human "civilization and reflection"—this is an accurate judgment made on the basis of extensive scientific research. It is objective and fair: atheism embodies the primary process of humanity's infinite development from barbarism to civilization, from blindness to reflection, and from incomplete to complete knowledge. It represents the fundamental spirit of being human, and expressing all its "results" is impossible without sufficient knowledge.
In this regard, theism and atheism concern only the question of factual truth—which is closer to truth and which tends toward fallacy—and have no necessary connection to a person’s moral character or political orientation. Some scholars today speak loftily of the moral attributes of religion, believing that all religious groups act with "kindness" (行善), even advocating for the use of religion to maintain social order and coordinate interpersonal relationships. This is neither consistent with history nor with current facts, and it is logically unsound. Similarly, to say that atheism is inherently evil, lawless, or necessarily equates to political progress is equally inconsistent with the facts and logically flawed—because politics, morality, and belief in ghosts and gods belong to entirely different spheres. However, once theism becomes organized—including the construction of ideological systems and the establishment of church organizations—the situation changes fundamentally. It is further endowed with ideological significance and acquires social functions. Pure theism belongs to the realm of religious concepts and is limited to the spiritual level; as organized religion, it gains the function of social edification and forms social groups; spiritual force is transformed into material force.
The dual organization of theism—both spiritual and material—forced a corresponding complexity in the content of atheism. It moved far beyond the scope of "who speaks the facts and who possesses the truth" to involve worldviews, outlooks on life, value systems, and almost all areas of real life, including morality, politics, society, and law. This type of atheism reached its climax in the West starting from the Renaissance, passing through the Enlightenment to the Young Hegelians, alongside the development of the new bourgeoisie’s opposition to feudal theocratic politics and the great advances in modern science. Because the atheism of this period had a distinct anti-feudal and anti-theological character, it is generally referred to as "militant atheism." Furthermore, because it fully adopted the scientific achievements of the time, using the scientific spirit and methods as weapons and driving scientific development, it is also called "scientific atheism."
II. Types of Atheism and the Characteristics of Marxist Atheism
The concept of "atheism" was imported from the West and was directed specifically at Christian theism. Traditionally, Christianity recognizes only one God and denies any deities worshipped by other religions, which gave Western atheism a specific anti-monotheistic quality. Christianity held a dominant position in the Western ideological and cultural sphere for at least sixteen or seventeen hundred years, and its influence persists; in the last 20 years, under the vigorous cultivation of the United States, it seems to be reclaiming its power. Consequently, the atheistic trends directed against Christianity have also persisted throughout history, rising and falling in various forms and rich content—such as deism, pantheism, skepticism, agnosticism, and even Nominalism (as a branch of theology), all of which became variants of atheism.
Current Western atheism, on the one hand, defends science—for example, by opposing Intelligent Design and strengthening scientific research into religious mystical experiences; on the other hand, it defends democracy, upholding the constitutional principle of the separation of church and state, opposing the entry of religion into schools, and even more so opposing the use of religion for war mobilization or as an excuse for violence. However, the most powerful force is the summons to human rationality by the process of social secularization, leading to the rise of so-called Secular Humanism and the New Atheism movement. We also call these forms "scientific atheism." Their slogan is not "combat with religion" but the promotion of a non-religious life. They believe that a non-religious life—relying on human intelligence and talent to pursue human happiness—highlights human nature more than reliance on external forces like God, and is better suited to the development of human independence and freedom.
Broadly speaking, Marxist atheism also falls within the category of scientific atheism, but it is more thorough and scientific; it is the advanced form of scientific atheism. Regarding Marx himself, his complete break from the Christian dominance of his family and school occurred during his participation in the Young Hegelian movement and his break with Hegelian idealist philosophy. Engels, recalling the situation of those years, wrote: "Because of the practical necessity of struggling against existing religion, a large number of the most resolute Young Hegelians returned to the materialism of England and France... Then came Feuerbach's The Essence of Christianity... One must oneself have experienced the liberating effect of this book to get an idea of it. Enthusiasm was general; we all became at once Feuerbachians. How enthusiastically Marx greeted the new conception and how much—in spite of all critical reservations—he was influenced by it, one may read in The Holy Family." This "new conception" was humanist atheism—it overturned the delusion of God creating man, showing instead that man created God. Following this, the entire worldview was turned upside down. This was the highest achievement of the French Enlightenment and the end of German classical philosophy. As everyone knows, Marx then shifted from the critique of Feuerbach’s abstract humanism to the study of "man" as the totality of social relations. In particular, his discovery of the materialist conception of history and surplus value prompted his shift from the critique of religion and the elucidation of atheism to the creation and leadership of the scientific socialist movement—from a thinker to a great revolutionary. In this regard, Marxist critique of religion also shifted from primarily critiquing feudalism to primarily critiquing the Christianity that maintains the capitalist system and bourgeois interests. His atheism is integrated into his entire theoretical system and the practice of scientific socialism. Therefore, we can say there is no such thing as a "Marxist view of religion" or "atheism" that exists apart from the Marxist totality. Anyone who discusses the Marxist view of religion and atheism in isolation from the Marxist totality is fragmenting Marxism. Similarly, to treat Marxist research as an abstraction, intentionally bypassing the Marxist critique of religion—and especially to purge the atheistic worldview from the elucidation and study of the Marxist view of religion—is a base act of emasculation. I personally do not believe that the "essence" of the Marxist view of religion is atheism; rather, atheism is the cornerstone and starting point of its entire religious worldview. This is because atheism is only one component, or a general attribute, of its view of religion; it is not its unique distinguishing feature. Just as the doctrines of class and class struggle are components of scientific socialism—and whoever attempts to excise them from the study of class society is a revisionist—they are nevertheless not the exclusive property of Marxism, nor were they "discovered" by Marx.
What are the defining characteristics of Marxist atheism? First, it proceeds from the historical materialist [6] framework, insisting that history must explain religion rather than religion explaining history. It thereby identifies the social foundations of religion's emergence and digs up the roots of theism. Simultaneously, it draws a clear line of demarcation against "culturalism"—the tendency to explain religion through "culture" and "culture" through religion—which one-sidedly exaggerates the function of religion and "pan-culturalizes" it. Second, through the analysis of capitalism via the theory of surplus value, it discovered that the true subject and driving force of the socialist movement is the proletariat, which represents the advanced productive forces. Thus, atheism was integrated into the scientific socialist movement as an organic component. Third, it inherits and develops the finest achievements of human thought regarding atheism, particularly the continuous contributions made by science. This ensures that atheism is constantly enriched, substantiated, and persuasive, while simultaneously clearing away the obstacles of religious theology for the sustained development of science. Thus, Marxist atheism possesses three most distinct characteristics: the theory of historical materialism, the practice of the scientific socialist movement, and a scientific spirit that permeates throughout.
Lenin inherited Marxist atheism and made important developments to it. In practice, this atheism served as a conceptual weapon for the "criticism by weapons" against Russian theocracy, and as a primary measure to prevent and purge religious erosion within the workers' party. In theory, Lenin—specifically from the philosophical foundation of materialism and dialectical epistemology—conducted a methodological analysis and critique of religious fallacies. In particular, his focus on Plato and Aristotle (venerated as philosophical foundations by Christian theology) and Neo-Kantianism (widely utilized by modern and contemporary theology) was a pioneering effort in revealing the epistemological roots of religion. In doing so, he also developed the epistemology of dialectical materialism. For various reasons, Lenin’s contributions in these areas have been almost entirely excluded from the scope of the "Marxist view of religion." The resulting loss has made our research appear impoverished and lacking in more active constructiveness. To draw everyone's attention, I cite a passage here for your consideration:
"Human knowledge is not (or does not follow) a straight line, but a curve, which endlessly approximates a series of circles, a spiral. Any fragment, segment, or section of this curve can be transformed (transformed one-sidedly) into an independent, complete, straight line, which then (if one sees the trees but not the forest) leads into the quagmire, into clericalism (where it is anchored by the class interests of the ruling classes). Rectilinearity and one-sidedness, woodenness and petrification, subjectivism and subjective blindness—voilà the epistemological roots of idealism. And clericalism (= philosophical idealism), of course, has epistemological roots, it is not groundless; it is a sterile flower undoubtedly, but a sterile flower that grows on the living tree of living, fertile, genuine, powerful, omnipotent, objective, absolute human knowledge." (On the Question of Dialectics)
Guiding people on how to think correctly and avoid or minimize errors is also one of the finest traditions of the Communist Party of China. It has played a massive, irreplaceable role in ensuring our correct understanding of Chinese history, our judgment of the nature of society, and our assessment of the current situation. The fallacies of religious theology provide rich material for studying why human cognition commits errors and how to correct these errors to trend toward correct understanding. Lenin proposed this task in the struggle against religious mists; it should naturally be a subject of Marxist atheism.
Historically, the term "atheism" (wushenlun) did not exist in China, because China has traditionally been a country where polytheism and atheism coexist. "People-centeredness" [7] and "the people are of supreme importance" [8] are traditional concepts that have permeated three thousand years of history; the parallel processes of deification and de-deification constitute China's unique religious character. The elevation of conscious atheism to a philosophical level began with the emergence of the concepts of qi [9] and dao [10], which completely excluded the mystical dimensions of "Heaven" (tian) and the "unity of Heaven and man." By the Spring and Autumn and Warring States periods [11] and the contention of a hundred schools of thought, religion held no independent status. Since the Han and Wei dynasties, indigenous Taoism and imported Buddhism emerged, standing alongside Confucianism as the "Three Teachings" (三教), which formed a relatively stable cultural structure prior to the Opium War. Within this, Taoism viewed "immortals" (shenxian) as the highest achievement of "human" cultivation; Buddhism placed "celestial gods" (tianshen) within the ranks of sentient beings without any special privileges—even the Buddha, the highest fruit of attainment, is an "Awakened One" accessible to all, not a Creator. Therefore, there has never been a god who created the world or man in China; it does not recognize the world or humanity as the creation of some deity. Legends speak of Pangu [12] separating heaven and earth, and Nüwa [13] creating humans and repairing the sky, but these are myths regarding the ancestors of the Huaxia [14] people, absolutely not objects of faith. Great floods occurred in antiquity, but the one who controlled the waters to save the people was Yu the Great [15], not an ark given by God to Noah. Fire resulted from Sui Ren's [16] invention of drilling wood, not a spark stolen by Prometheus from Zeus in heaven. Emphasis was placed on human nature, with long-standing debates over its goodness or evil, but there was never an admission of innate sin, nor a search for redemption by a Savior.
Precisely for this reason, there was no Western-style theology or an atheism dedicated to refuting theology. The oldest religious behaviors involved divination to detect the "Mandate of Heaven" (tianming) or celestial luck, which extended to physiognomy, palmistry, calculating the "eight characters" of birth (bazi), observing celestial phenomena, and fengshui—parts of which are akin to shamanism (wu xi) and are today criticized as ignorant superstition. Ancient opponents labeled these behaviors "attacking the void and false" (ji xuwang) [17]. The truly theoretical significance lay in the "immortality of the soul" (shen bumie lun) advocated by Buddhism and the "mortality of the soul" (shenmie lun) [18] advocated by its critics—here, "soul" (shen) refers only to the spirit. Concepts of ghosts and monsters (guimei wangliang) were common, collectively known as "theism regarding ghosts" (youguilun), while opponents were "atheists regarding ghosts" (wuguilun). Other illegal idol worship was called "licentious cults" (yinsi), and illegal religious organizations were called "evil cults" (xiejiao) [19], and so on; none of these belong to the Western concept of atheism. The appearance of the Chinese concept of "atheism" (wushenlun) is directly related to the introduction of Christianity. Its first user was likely Zhang Taiyan [20] in his work On Atheism, which directed its edge against monotheisms like Christianity. Later, it was used by May Fourth Movement [21] figures like Chen Duxiu and Hu Shi to further categorize contemporary Chinese spiritualism and other ignorant superstitions as "theism," using the term "atheism" to negate them all along with the "God" of monotheism. The atheism we usually refer to primarily follows this May Fourth tradition.
(To be continued)
Network Editor: Jia Fei