Wang Xiang: The Atheistic Thought in Marx's Doctoral Dissertation and Its Significance in the New Era
From the beginning of 1839 to March 1841, Marx spent over two years completing his doctoral dissertation, The Difference Between the Democritean and Epicurean Philosophy of Nature (hereafter referred to as the Dissertation). During his university years, Marx was deeply influenced by Hegelian philosophy and Bruno Bauer’s philosophy of religion; he sought to complete a critique of Christian theology by establishing atheistic principles, thereby providing theoretical arguments and intellectual weapons for the struggle against feudal autocracy. In the developmental history of Marxist scientific atheism, the Dissertation is undoubtedly the true opening work of Marx’s theory of religious critique, representing a crucial first step on the road toward scientific atheism. Despite being profoundly influenced by Hegelian idealism—and particularly Bauer's philosophy of self-consciousness—the atheistic thought contained within the Dissertation remains the logical starting point for the emergence of all Marxist scientific atheism, providing the intellectual foundation for a revolutionary transformation toward scientific atheism.
I. The Atheistic Motivations Behind the Selection of Marx’s Dissertation Topic
In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, Germany was a feudal state that adhered to religious theology, and its autocratic system exerted every effort to utilize religious theology in the service of its rule. However, unlike other parts of Germany, Marx’s homeland, the Rhine Province, had been occupied by Napoleon’s armies for over twenty years and was deeply influenced by French Enlightenment thought. At this time, an intellectual movement appeared among German Jews to break the shackles of Judaism and actively accept the penetration of Enlightenment thought through Protestantism. "Under the thick influence of rationalism, humanism, and liberalism in both home and school, Marx’s intellectual change from middle school to university underwent a developmental process from believing in religion to doubting religion, and finally to opposing and criticizing religion." [1] As early as 1816 to 1825, Marx's father, steeped in liberal ideas, led the entire family to convert to Protestantism. Later, during his middle school years from 1830 to 1835, Marx received further personal instruction from many teachers who were rich in the Enlightenment spirit and adhered to materialist atheism. These experiences exerted the initial influence that guided the young Marx toward the path of Enlightenment thought and liberalism, an influence concentrated in two assigned essays Marx wrote during his school years.
The first assigned essay was "The Union of Believers with Christ According to John 15:1–14, Showing its Basis and Essence, its Absolute Necessity, and its Effects," which is the earliest exposition by Marx on the question of religion that we possess. At this time, as a middle school student whose thought was not yet mature, Marx was undoubtedly interpreting the "absolute necessity" of the union of the believer and Christ according to the logic of religious fideism; the entire essay contains a spirit of mysticism and fideism. However, it is worth mentioning that even then, Marx demonstrated a spirit of independent thinking that differed from orthodox theology and Christian dogma. He sought to interpret the mystical theological question of the union of man and God from a secular perspective, using the continuous elevation of one's own moral level as the path to achieving union with the divine, and using this to define the essence of man. This answer was clearly inspired by the Enlightenment atheism that followed the Renaissance, indicating that Marx had already begun to think independently about religious issues within the theoretical framework of 17th and 18th-century deism. Enlightenment atheism was precisely the substance and core of the Young Hegelian critique of religion, which would later have a major influence on Marx’s selection of his dissertation topic. It can be said that the Enlightenment atheistic ideas contained in this assigned essay were Marx’s first attempt to shift from a traditional religious view toward Enlightenment atheism, and they were the germ of his later exploration of liberalism through the perspective of religious critique in his dissertation.
The second assigned essay was Marx’s graduation thesis, "Reflections of a Young Man on the Choice of a Profession." In this article, the young Marx linked the pursuit of perfect morality in ethical humanism with the Christian concept of salvation to elaborate on the value and significance of one's professional choice. He advocated that an individual's limited, egoistic pleasure should be subordinated to the ideals and happiness of all humanity: "Religion itself teaches us that the Ideal [Christ] whom all strive to copy sacrificed Himself for the sake of mankind... If we have chosen the position in life in which we can most of all work for mankind, no burdens can bow us down, because they are sacrifices endured for the sake of all; then we shall experience no petty, limited, selfish joy, but our happiness will belong to millions, our deeds will live on quietly but perpetually at work, and over our ashes will be shed the hot tears of noble people." [2] Although Marx at this time did not—and could not—profoundly recognize the true path to realizing human happiness as the value orientation of professional choice, this simple and lofty ethical humanism, especially the selfless radiance of atheistic humanism, guided Marx’s future struggle and closely linked him with socialist and communist ideas. In this article, it is noteworthy and commendable that the basic viewpoints of the historical materialist [3] outlook—the theoretical foundation of scientific atheism—already flashed like a spark in the mind of this gifted youth: "...we cannot always attain the office to which we believe we are called; our relations in society have already begun to be established and fixed to a certain extent before we are in a position to determine them." [4] This indicates that the young Marx recognized the restrictive role of pre-existing social relations on the freedom of professional choice. Certain ideas of historical materialism and atheism were already slowly forming in his mind; although still constrained by religious fideism, they foreshadowed the coming of a truly revolutionary transformation in atheism and even philosophical theory. In short, the ethical humanism of his middle school years, especially atheistic humanism, became the internal motivation that drove Marx’s later selection of his dissertation topic and the realization of his intellectual shift.
The greatest influence on the choice of Marx’s dissertation topic was the religious-critical philosophy of Bruno Bauer, a leading figure of the Young Hegelians; central to Bauer’s philosophy was his atheistic thought. In October 1836, after transferring to the University of Berlin, Marx was quickly infected by the intense philosophical atmosphere of the school and turned toward the intellectual world of Hegelian philosophy. In particular, Marx firmly accepted the idea within Hegelian dialectics regarding the continuous movement, development, and transformation of nature and human society, and he saw in it a rational path to argue for political democratization through Hegelian philosophy. Consequently, joining the Young Hegelians—who were keen on using historical critiques of traditional Christianity to lead into political critique—became an inevitable choice for the young Marx. The spiritual leader of the Young Hegelians was Bruno Bauer, and the university-aged Marx was an active member of the group, a key participant in the "Doctor’s Club" [5], and a talented youth upon whom Bauer relied heavily. During this period, Strauss’s The Life of Jesus and Bruno Bauer’s critical research on the Gospels deeply influenced Marx’s religious outlook, thoroughly leading him onto the path of religious critique and atheism in his philosophical studies. It could be said that during this period, Marx "realized the shift from traditional faith to Enlightenment atheism, which was effectively the first leap in the developmental process of Marx’s lifelong thought." [6] Due to the conservative and oppressive political and religious atmosphere in Germany at the time, Bruno Bauer did not openly propagate atheism, but instead found ways to express and confirm it in an obscure and roundabout way through the form of Hegelian philosophy. In the book The Trumpet of the Last Judgment against Hegel the Atheist and Antichrist, Bauer, under the guise of criticizing the atheism of Hegelian philosophy, loudly proclaimed ideas of religious critique, pushing Enlightenment atheism to the forefront of history and thereby confirming the Young Hegelians' status as the orthodox heirs to Hegel’s philosophical authority. It can be said that The Trumpet of the Last Judgment became a watershed in the complete break between philosophy and religion; through it, Hegelian philosophy became a new form of atheism. Although Bauer’s religious critique and Enlightenment atheism deeply influenced the young Marx and led him to further confirm the spirit of religious doubt and the tendency toward Enlightenment atheism he had in middle school, Marx differed from Bauer. Adhering to the professional ideal of atheistic humanism, Marx was not satisfied with a purely religious-philosophical critique. Instead, he placed more value on the more practically significant political critique linked to the critique of religion—namely, solving real political problems through political democratization reforms. After the failure of his attempt with core Young Hegelian figures to organize the militant Enlightenment atheistic journal The Archive of Atheism (Atheistisches Archiv), Marx gradually realized the importance of conducting a thorough critique of religion. Thus, he resolutely maintained a distance from the Young Hegelians regarding religious critique. Instead of blindly following Bauer, he devoted himself to writing his dissertation from a higher perspective, continuously carrying out self-critique and self-negation through new reflections. The Dissertation was the "precursor to a larger work" [7] through which Marx sought to move from religious critique to political reform. It "represented the atheistic thought of Marx during his student years; this thought was a continuation of the progressive ideas of his middle school years and a prelude to reaching scientific atheism." [8]
II. The Atheistic Thought Contained in Marx’s Dissertation
The Dissertation is the beginning of Marx’s formal establishment of atheistic principles and his use of them as a foundation for a systematic critique of religion. This philosophical work is both a theoretical summary of the atheistic motivations that had previously influenced him and a milestone that led his atheistic thought further into depth, thereby opening a new stage of development for atheism. It contains rich atheistic content and serves as the logical starting point for understanding and interpreting the whole of scientific atheism, occupying an extremely important position in the developmental history of Marxist scientific atheism.
First, by elaborating on "self-consciousness," Marx affirmed Epicurean natural philosophy and thereby established the philosophical principles of atheism ontologically. The selection of Marx’s dissertation topic was deeply influenced by Hegelian idealism and Bruno Bauer’s religious-critical thought. He chose the difference between the natural philosophy of Democritus and Epicurus as his subject precisely because the anti-theological nature of their philosophies ignited the young Marx's theoretical passion to use philosophical ontology for religious critique and the verification of atheistic principles. Democritus was the greatest materialist natural philosopher of ancient Greece; he used atoms and the void to explain the origin of the world, representing the highest achievement of ancient naive materialism. Democritus proposed that the organization, structure, form, and characteristics of atoms, along with their movement in the void, constituted the origin and order of the material world. This fundamentally negated the religious myths built on the ethereal and illusory, overturned the mystical forces that had long clouded people's minds, and, through theoretical reasoning, compared the divinities of different nations and regions to reveal the atheistic conclusion that religious theology originates in human self-creation. Democritus's philosophy was a peak in the history of natural philosophy, and his religious theories and atheistic thoughts far surpassed those of his contemporary philosophers. Epicurean philosophy, appearing during the period of ancient Greek decline, inherited and developed the basic ideas of Democritus’s materialist natural philosophy and atheism. It fully affirmed the decisive significance of Democritus’s naive materialism regarding atoms and their swerving movement for the generation of the material world, and its basic philosophical nature was completely consistent with Democritus’s atomic materialism, which also provided an ontological defense for atheism.
In his doctoral thesis, Marx explicitly states his atheistic position at the very outset: "In simple words, I hate all gods... I would rather be bound to the rock than be the obedient servant of Zeus." [12] Marx highly praised the significance of the Enlightenment atheism in Epicurus’s natural philosophy; to this end, he further explored the differences between the natural philosophies of Epicurus and Democritus, striving to use "self-consciousness" to defend Epicurus’s doctrine of the "swerve of the atom." Democritus believed that atoms fall in straight, parallel lines through the void, such that no collisions or contact would occur between them; thus, no rational explanation could be provided for how atoms could combine into matter. In contrast, Epicurus held that atoms engage in a motion of spontaneous swerving and collision, and that this swerving collision between atoms is the core mechanism by which matter is generated. Epicurus’s theory of the "atomic swerve" required research and explanation by the natural sciences, particularly physics; in fact, it indeed pointed the way and laid the physical foundation for the development of modern science in the 17th and 18th centuries, as represented by Newton, Galileo, and Boyle. However, due to the limitations of the productive forces at the time—especially the developmental level of the natural sciences—Epicurus did not provide any explanation in the physical or philosophical sense for the cause of the atoms' spontaneous swerving. This gap in philosophical reasoning inevitably preserved a space for religious theology, becoming a major flaw in the anti-theological aspect of Epicurus’s natural philosophy—a point of which Marx was fully aware in his doctoral thesis. Yet, at this time, Marx was not a materialist; deeply influenced by Hegelian idealistic philosophy, he sought to use Bruno Bauer’s "self-consciousness" and Hegel’s "Absolute Spirit" or "Absolute Idea" to provide a spiritual-level explanation for Epicurus’s "atomic swerve." In the thesis, Marx viewed the swerving motion of atoms as a spiritual manifestation of the atom’s "self-consciousness" and "free will," arguing that "self-consciousness" is the expression of reason and possesses a supreme status above religious divinity. In the world of philosophy, "there should be no god standing alongside human self-consciousness" [13]; the principle of philosophy is self-consciousness, while the essence of religion is obscurantism [6], and an irreconcilable contradiction exists between the two. Thus, "self-consciousness" became a powerful weapon to plug the holes in Epicurus’s "atomic swerve" and defend his Enlightenment atheism. From the perspective of dialectical materialism and historical materialism, using the idealistic concepts of "self-consciousness" and "free will" to defend Epicurean philosophy is clearly biased, which reflects the philosophical immaturity of Marx at this stage. However, any theoretical thought is a product of history and requires us to understand and analyze it objectively from the perspective of historical development. The doctoral thesis’s defense of Epicurean philosophy through "self-consciousness" still possesses significant philosophical and atheistic value: first, it overcame the metaphysical and mechanical defects of Democritus’s atomic materialism by injecting dialectical methods into the understanding of the category of matter, affirming the interconnection and interaction between atoms and matter; second, it affirmed the idea that atoms endowed with spiritual "freedom" are the origin of the world, thereby excluding religious theology ontologically and establishing the principle of an atheistic stance in philosophical thought. This collapsed the authenticity of religious myths at the level of philosophical reason and fundamentally undermined the foundations of Christianity. "Thus, the most brilliant part of the doctoral thesis is that Marx gave play to militant atheistic thought, indicating that the basic stance of atheism had already been established." [14]
Second, the use of alienation theory to rationally explain nature defends Epicurus's anti-religious philosophy and confers an activist tendency upon atheism. Throughout the history of the development of Marxist atheism, alienation theory has always been an important conceptual method for Marx to explore religious issues, and the doctoral thesis is undoubtedly the origin [7] of Marx’s use of alienation theory to analyze early human nature worship and promote the spirit of atheism. To defend Epicurus’s Enlightenment philosophy of anti-religion and anti-celestial worship, Marx used the brilliant theory of alienation in his doctoral thesis to analyze the relationship between the real world and the religious world, researching early human nature worship to derive the roots of the emergence and existence of religion. In the ancient world, the level of development of productive forces was low and science and technology were underdeveloped; people could not provide rational explanations for various natural phenomena. Faced with powerful natural forces, people experienced immense fear and helplessness, leading to the birth of various forms of nature worship and primitive religion. Epicurus even took the human fear and suspicion of nature as the psychological root of the emergence of primitive religion. In Marx's view, the alienation of man from nature is the reason primitive religion can emerge, and it governs every relationship toward nature. "But when we recognize that nature is rational, our dependence on it no longer exists." [15] "Any relationship to nature is itself simultaneously the alienation of nature." [16] Since religion originates from man's dependence on nature, breaking this relationship of alienation and subsequently escaping man's fear of nature requires a rational explanation of nature. Epicurus believed that the highest good in the human world is that which brings joy and happiness, and philosophy is the means and tool to make life joyful and happy because philosophy can eliminate all factors that make man feel uneasy and fearful—namely, divine punishment and death. The rational expression of philosophy is the fundamental path to breaking religious superstition, seeking tranquility of the soul, and ultimately escaping alienation. Hegel’s idealistic philosophy and the "self-consciousness" or "self-will" of the Young Hegelians became the best representatives of this rational expression at the time. It is evident that in his doctoral thesis, Marx accepted Hegelian idealistic philosophy; his cognition of alienation was limited by the level of the Young Hegelians' philosophical and religious theories and possessed the obvious character of Epicurean natural philosophy. However, in the doctoral thesis, Marx was not entirely restricted by Bruno Bauer’s purely speculative critique of religion, but actively sought breakthroughs from the perspective of alienation theory. It is undeniable that the proposal of the theory of alienation opened the way for the shift from the critique of religion to the critique of politics and for the formation of scientific atheism.
"Marx’s theory of alienation is not the result of a self-deduction from a generic, a priori category of alienation; on the contrary, the concept of alienation gradually grew and developed during the process of the generation of Marx’s theoretical thought." [17] Marx’s thought on alienation underwent a progressive evolutionary process from "religious alienation" and "political alienation" to "labor alienation" and "money alienation," and the exposition of "religious alienation" in the strict sense began with the doctoral thesis. In the thesis, Marx explicitly proposed the view that religion is the alienation of self-consciousness, criticizing the orthodox status of divinity by exalting human reason and viewing nature as the embodiment of reason; Epicurus was the greatest Greek Enlightenment thinker who struck down religion and liberated the human spirit from the weight of religious pressure. At the same time, Marx further pointed out that those so-called proofs of the existence of God "are nothing but proofs of the existence of the self-consciousness of the human essence, logical proofs of the existence of self-consciousness." [18] Therefore, the God in religion is merely an impersonal existence that stands above man and performs specific social functions; it is the existence of the alienation of self-consciousness. The critique of religion is the prerequisite for all other critiques, and religious alienation is the prerequisite for the formation of other alienation theories. In Marx’s view, the alienation of self-consciousness should not be limited merely to the purely speculative subjective category, nor should it be satisfied with its own logical deduction; rather, it should be directed toward actual secular political activities. "It is a psychological law that the theoretical spirit, having become free in itself, turns into practical energy, and, emerging as will from Amenthes’ shadow kingdom, turns against the worldly reality which exists without it—this is a psychological law." [19] In the doctoral thesis, Marx was already using the category of practice to bridge self-consciousness and secular activities; although the concept of practice at this time did not possess the character of dialectical materialism, it nevertheless pointed the way for the "world-becoming" of philosophy and endowed atheism with an activist—meaning militant—tendency. This militant atheistic spirit in the doctoral thesis, aimed at defending Epicurus’s anti-religious philosophy, objectively inherited and promoted the 18th-century French militant atheistic tradition characterized by the exaltation of reason, unequivocally establishing its own basic atheistic stance. What is most valuable here is that Marx's atheism in the doctoral thesis began to gradually break away from the mechanical and metaphysical nature of French militant atheism, using the spirit of dialectics to endow "self-consciousness" with active, dynamic, and creative qualities. This opened the path for the transition from "religious alienation" to "political alienation," "labor alienation," and "money alienation," opening the door for the eventual completion of the revolutionary transformation of scientific atheism. Regarding this, Engels later commented: "Materialism became indifferent to man. In order to overcome its opponent, the bloodless, fleshless spiritualism, in its own field, materialism was forced to crucify its own flesh and become an ascetic. Thus it turned from a sensory being into an intellectual being; but in doing so, it developed all the consistency, regardless of consequences, characteristic of the intellect." [20]
Third, the refutation of Plutarch's theological ideas on the immortality of the soul and the proofs of the existence of gods confirms atheistic humanism. In the form of an appendix to his doctoral thesis, Marx explicitly refuted the theological ideas of Plutarch, a Greek thinker of the Roman era, regarding the immortality of the soul and the proofs of the existence of gods. Plutarch believed: "The common people, although they fear life after death, are inspired by myths with hopes of immortality and a passionate desire for existence; this love, the oldest and most powerful in all its forms, is filled with a joy and excitement that suppresses this childish fear. Those who have lost children, spouses, and friends would always rather their loved ones exist or reside in some place, even if in suffering, than be completely dead, destroyed, and turned into nothingness." [21] In Marx's view, this sentiment of the "common people" described by Plutarch is an irrational existence, and "irrationality is the existence of God." [22] It is precisely because reason does not exist that God has a reason to exist; however, this existence that man desires should be an empirical existence—that is, existence in a "sensory space"—and by no means the eternal existence of the immortality of the soul, that unperceivable and unexperiencable void advocated by Plutarch. To this end, Marx refuted Plutarch’s "doctrine of the immortality of the soul" in his doctoral thesis: "If one speaks only of love, then a man's wife and children are preserved most purely in his heart, which is an existence much higher than empirical existence. But the matter is different; since the individual himself is only an empirical existence, the wife and children belonging to the individual also only exist as experience. That he would rather have them exist anywhere in the 'emotional space,' however bad the place may be, than not exist anywhere at all, is merely to say that the individual wishes to be conscious of his own empirical existence." [23] Plutarch’s theistic argument appealing to the "sentiments of the common people" is nothing more than a "semblance of sentiment" that does not conform to "empirical" facts; it is a subjective "form of consciousness" detached from objective existence. This is because such proofs of the existence of God are nothing but empty tautologies; to prove the existence of God is to prove the non-existence of God, and to refute the existence of the idea of any god.
Plutarch, proceeding from the abstract sentiments of the common masses, interrogates Epicurus’s atheism—a product of the anti-religious Enlightenment—aiming his spear directly at the ethical and moral crisis caused by Epicurus’s destruction of the fear of divine punishment and the post-mortal underworld. He posits atheism in opposition to social moral construction and meaningful, active social engagement: "Or more correctly, they believe that present life has no meaning; they drift along in a state of terminal security and fail to live well; due to their own cowardice, they despise virtue and active engagement, and they despise themselves, believing their lives to be brief, unstable, and incapable of producing anything of value." [28] Plutarch bases human ethico-moral behavior upon the foundation of awe toward the gods and a terrifying consciousness of divine retribution. This is a typical theological viewpoint and a theme strongly opposed by Epicurean philosophy. In fact, such theological ravings that leave people trapped in terror all day long are precisely what is most immoral: "To base morality on the minor moral attributes of God, and not to distinguish God from the consistency of action, leaves man no longer knowing what he should do—whether in the question of his duty toward God, his duty toward himself, or his duty toward others. Therefore, nothing is more dangerous than to advise people that there exists a superhuman power before which they must cease the activity of reason, and for the sake of which they must sacrifice everything on earth today if they wish to attain happiness." [29] Marx believed that the existence of God is a product of human irrationality; God, in the final analysis, originates from man. The irrational state of the external world and various evils provided the breeding ground for the survival of the concept of God. To be liberated from theological ravings, one must resort to rational philosophical analysis—namely, atheistic humanism. "In Marx's philosophical concepts at that time, religion was already regarded as the opposite of philosophy; philosophy is absolute freedom, while religion is a servant of God." [30] Compared to the atheistic humanism in his secondary school essay Reflections of a Young Man on the Choice of a Profession, the atheistic humanism in his doctoral thesis further treats religion as the antithesis of rational philosophical analysis. This was both Marx’s response to the original intention of previous atheistic humanism and an attempt to liberate himself from the naive humanistic illusions of the past. It was an important effort to explore the intrinsic connection between atheism and the pursuit of human happiness from the height of a philosophical worldview, possessing significant weight on the path toward scientific atheism. In fact, with the later establishment of the Marxist scientific worldview, the atheistic humanism developed along the direction of rational philosophy became an important ideological foundation for the emergence of scientific atheism and a vital source of communist thought.
- The Significance of Marx’s Doctoral Thesis in the New Era The emergence of any scientific theory does not occur in a vacuum; it is based on past historical accumulation and is continuously confirmed and sublimated through comparison and struggle with contemporary theoretical forms. This process contains both an adherence and response to past theoretical beliefs and witnesses a mental journey of continuous self-criticism and self-negation. Marxist scientific atheism, as the highest stage of development in the history of atheism, is no exception. Marx’s doctoral thesis inherits the achievements of Western religious critique and atheistic research, while also serving as an important document that opened a new stage in the development of atheism. It holds the milestone significance of "bridging the past and the future" in the developmental history of Marxist scientific atheism, and it is of great significance for strengthening atheistic theoretical research and scientific atheistic education in the New Era.
First, we must carry forward the spirit of thorough critique of Marxist scientific atheism in facing problems, being courageous and skilled in conducting ideological struggles against all forms of theism. Looking at the entire process from the selection of the topic to the writing of the doctoral thesis, Marx consistently maintained a sharp problem-oriented approach and a combative spirit of atheism. Since his youth, Marx was deeply influenced by the Enlightenment spirit and atheistic thought, paying particular attention to the study of practical religious issues. Later, he actively participated in the religious critique movement initiated by Germany’s advanced intellectual circles, represented by the Young Hegelians [10]. Starting with his doctoral thesis, scientific atheistic research initiated the historical precedent of Marx’s religious critique leading toward political, economic, and social critiques. He began to point the spear of critique continuously at religious theology, at old materialism, at the Young Hegelians who were obsessed with the vulgarization of religious critique, and even engaged in continuous self-criticism and self-negation. It can be said that the critical study of religious issues constituted the logical starting point of all Marx’s theoretical activities. This religious theory, with atheism at its core, became the ideological beginning of the communist doctrine later founded by Marx and Engels. In essence, Marxist scientific atheism is critical; this criticality is rooted in its practical and epochal nature. It possesses a distinct orientation toward religious problems and a thorough fighting spirit, embodying a consciousness of transformation, innovation, and "worrying about potential perils" [11]. This is precisely the secret why Marxist scientific atheism has forged ahead and remained forever young for over 180 years. The 20th National Congress of the CPC profoundly pointed out: "Problems are the voice of the times; answering and guiding the resolution of problems is the fundamental task of theory." [31] Today, the complexity of various problems we face, including those in the religious field, and the difficulty of solving them have significantly increased, placing higher demands on adhering to and developing Marxist scientific atheism. The struggle of atheism in the New Era not only shoulders the task of breaking the shackles of traditional religion and liberating people's spiritual world, but also possesses the important function of resisting the infiltration of reactionary religious forces from home and abroad and safeguarding national interests. This requires us to enhance our awareness of religious issues, always adhere to the fighting spirit of scientific atheism, carry forward the spirit of thorough critique of Marxist scientific atheism, and be courageous and skilled in conducting ideological struggles against all forms of theism to guarantee ideological security.
Second, we must view the theoretical evolution of atheism historically and dialectically, adhering to the broad vision of Marxism in treating the historical development of religious theory. Marxist scientific atheism is an inheritance and development of Western atheism. Western atheism, especially that of Ancient Greece and Rome, represents the intellectual essence of human cognition and contains rich theoretical nutrients. The choice of topic for Marx's doctoral thesis was precisely a defense and sublimation of Epicurus’s anti-religious Enlightenment philosophy, and its contemporary significance in highlighting atheism is self-evident. However, as a major member of the Young Hegelian religious critique movement, the young Marx accepted Bauer’s concept of "self-consciousness" and used it to explain and defend the atheistic nature of Epicurean natural philosophy. Although "self-consciousness" is a core concept used by Hegel’s idealist philosophy to explain the world system and is biased when used to thoroughly oppose religious theology, this revolutionary thought representing the requirements of the bourgeoisie at that time was indeed the highest level atheism could reach under the historical conditions of that period. Furthermore, this religious critique directed at real struggle pointed the way for the revolutionary leap of atheism in the next stage. As Engels later pointed out: "Politics was at that time a very thorny field, and so the main struggle was transformed into a religious struggle; this struggle, especially from 1840 onwards, was indirectly also a political struggle. Strauss's The Life of Jesus, published in 1835, provided the first impulse. Later, Bruno Bauer opposed the theory of the origin of the Gospel myths expounded in that book, proving that many Gospel stories were fabricated by the authors themselves. The dispute between the two was conducted under the philosophical guise of the struggle of 'self-consciousness' against 'substance'." [32] True, the Marx who wrote the doctoral thesis was still under the shadow of Bauer’s philosophy of self-consciousness, which was inconsistent with the developmental level and conclusions of the natural sciences (physics) of the time; however, this was determined by the intellectual conditions of the era and was a product of history. Facts have also proven that as a genius thinker, the subsequent Marx did not limit himself to this but continued to engage in self-criticism and self-negation. Thus, any viewpoint that uses the idealist reasons of self-consciousness in Marx’s doctoral thesis to take words out of context and deny its atheistic value is erroneous. Today, we must view the theoretical evolution of Marx’s atheistic thought dialectically, respect the theoretical contributions of each period of its development, and adhere to the broad vision of Marxism to understand and grasp scientific atheism from a grand historical scale.
Third, we must pursue the truth of Marxist scientific atheism with the spirit of truth, continuously opening new frontiers for atheistic research. From his secondary school graduation essay to his doctoral thesis, Marx’s religious thought underwent significant changes. The completion of the doctoral thesis was a major sign of the theoretical and systematic construction of Marx’s atheistic thought. It contained the sensory analysis of Enlightenment, the rational critique of alienation theory, the anti-religious spirit of the Young Hegelians, and the dialectical thinking method of Hegelian philosophy. These constituted the basic landscape of the development of atheism at that time and provided the internal drive for the development of atheism toward a new stage. Although it did not represent the emergence of scientific atheism at this point, the revolutionary transformation of atheism running along this truth-seeking ideological path was already germinating and ready to emerge. Practice knows no bounds, and theoretical innovation will not come to a halt. Today, Marxist scientific atheism has formed a complete set of scientific theoretical systems. However, concerning the essence of Marxist scientific atheism, its scientificity is reflected not only in its established viewpoints and conclusions, but more importantly, in the fact that it has opened an atheistic path for us to recognize, adhere to, and develop truth, providing the standpoint, viewpoints, and methods for observing, understanding, and solving religious problems. Lenin once profoundly pointed out: "In the 'reasons' put forward by those who abandon Marxism, one can often see fragments of quotes from Marx (especially when the verification is incorrect), which is not surprising." [33] The greatest obstacle to adhering to and developing Marxist scientific atheism is precisely the misreading and distortion that is detached from the background of the times. The 20th National Congress pointed out: "We must treat science with a scientific attitude and pursue truth with the spirit of truth." [34] To correctly understand and interpret the basic theories of Marxist scientific atheism, we must uphold the fundamentals and break new ground, adhering to the spirit of truth to pursue the truth of Marxist scientific atheism. We must never isolate the conclusions reached by classical writers in special circumstances from the conditions of their era, let alone arbitrarily dismantle or distort the basic spirit and historical generation of Marxist scientific atheism. Instead, we should grasp its scientific theoretical system from its entirety and continuously open new frontiers for atheistic research.
Fourth, we must uphold the philosophical implication of the ultimate concern within Marxist scientific atheism and champion the structural value concerns of scientific atheism. The doctoral dissertation was Marx’s first attempt to establish the principles of atheistic humanism from the perspective of philosophical ontology. Marx viewed philosophy as the antithesis of religion; while religion is the servant of God, philosophy must oppose all heavenly and earthly deities. Championing the rationality of philosophy is precisely the "salvation" of man’s ultimate concern [12]. Despite the existence of theoretical misconceptions and immaturity, this pursuit of world ontology indeed opened the door for the ultimate value concern of atheism, guiding scientific atheism to develop in the direction of humanity's ultimate concern. In fact, religious theism is a form of ultimate concern, but the religious ultimate concern only leads to a Plutarchian fear of the divine [13], an illusory liberation that stifles human nature within religious theism and offers no benefit to social development or progress. Philosophy is an ontological pursuit, an ultimate concern containing certainty and infinity. Without the ultimate concern of philosophy, a cultured nation would be "like a temple that is otherwise highly ornamented but is without a Holy of Holies." [37] [14] While Marxist scientific atheism stands in opposition to religious theism, it does not reject ultimate concern; on the contrary, it focuses even more intensely on the philosophical implications and practical paths of ultimate concern, consistently taking man’s concern for his own ultimate value as its theme. As the rationalized self-consciousness of humanity, scientific atheism is concerned with the ultimate value of man himself. This ultimate value must possess a clear and strong sense of social mission—namely, in terms of actual social systems and social formations, it points toward communist society. This is because only the social formation of communism, as the ultimate concern of humanity, can truly embody the organic unity of the withering away of religion, the liberation of humanity, and the well-rounded free development of the individual. The 20th National Congress of the CPC pointed out: "Any theory that is detached from the people will be feeble and powerless, and any theory that does not benefit the people will be devoid of vitality." [38] Today, as we uphold and develop Marxist scientific atheism, we must persist in the philosophical implication of its ultimate concern and champion the value concerns of scientific atheism—that is, truly realizing human liberation and well-rounded development in the historical process directed toward communism. Otherwise, breaking free from the shackles of religion remains empty talk, atheism will lose its practical relevance and broad mass base, and scientific atheism education will be out of the question. To this end, Marxist scientific atheism must not only focus on and grasp the latest achievements in the development of the natural sciences but should also shoulder various social responsibilities. It must take scientific atheist education, humanity's longing for a better life, and the well-rounded development of the individual as its historical mission, properly fulfilling its atheistic duty to realize the ultimate concern of humanity.