Zhang Qinmin: An Analysis of the Philosophical Overview and Theoretical Significance of Feuerbach’s Atheism
In academic circles, Feuerbach’s philosophy is generally termed "anthropological materialism," containing profound atheistic thoughts that Marx highly appraised, assimilated, and applied. In his Introduction to A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, Marx noted: "The criticism of religion is in the main complete, and the criticism of religion is the prerequisite of all criticism." He was referring precisely to Feuerbach’s critique of religion. Furthermore, in correspondence with Feuerbach, he stated directly: "You have (I do not know whether intentionally) provided a philosophical basis for socialism, and the Communists immediately understood your work in this way." The "philosophical basis" referred to here includes atheistic thought. Engels also gave high praise to the work The Essence of Christianity: "One must himself have experienced the liberating effect of this book to get an idea of it. Enthusiasm was general; we all became at once Feuerbachians." From this, the profundity and significant influence of Feuerbach’s atheistic thought are evident.
Scholarly attention toward Feuerbach's atheism often concentrates on "religious alienation"—that God is the alienation of the human essence. To a certain extent, this obscures the philosophical totality and rich content of Feuerbach’s atheism. Anthropological materialism is the "unity of naturalism and anthropology," composed of these two parts. "Religious alienation" is merely content within the anthropological part, neglecting the atheistic thought within naturalism; moreover, "God is the alienation of the human essence" cannot fully reflect the atheistic thought within anthropology itself. More importantly, within research on Feuerbach’s atheism, there remain unresolved problems: Feuerbach explicitly stated, "Backwards I agree with the materialists, but forwards I do not." That is to say, in naturalism, Feuerbach acknowledges his own materialistic atheistic stance, but what specific form does this materialistic atheism take? How does it differ from the peak of atheism at that time—eighteenth-century French atheism? Within anthropology, Feuerbach claimed to adhere to an "idealist" stance; how then does Feuerbach’s anthropology become atheism? In what sense was it recognized and inherited by Marx? Addressing these questions requires combing through the overall philosophical picture of Feuerbach to provide answers, thereby allowing for a better understanding of the theoretical value and practical significance of Feuerbach’s atheism.
I. Atheism in Naturalism
Naturalism takes the objective material world external to man as its object and is the most thorough manifestation of Feuerbach’s atheistic worldview. Naturalistic materialism originates from the critique of idealist philosophy. Its primary content includes a materialistic worldview and epistemology: the former targets the inverted worldview of "speculative metaphysics," while the latter targets the abstract identity of "thinking and being" in idealism. In terms of worldview, naturalism exposes the internal contradictions of the theological worldview, dismantling its legitimacy from within and establishing a materialistic worldview based on the primacy of the sensuous. In terms of epistemology, it exposes the idealistic substance of the "identity of thinking and being," philosophically denying the necessity and rationality of God in epistemology, and forming a materialistic epistemology centered on sensuous intuition [1].
In Feuerbach’s view, the development of theology passed through three stages: theism, pantheism, and idealism. Theism conceives of God as an entity independent of the world; however, regarding the essence of God, the determinations of God are the determinations of the world. Therefore, God cannot exist independently of the world. This contradiction pushed theism toward pantheism. Pantheism is a unity of reality and fantasy; in pantheism, God is the world itself, and matter and thought exist simultaneously as attributes of God. This actually acknowledges the reality of matter and makes it a "divine substance." Yet matter and God are naturally contradictory. Pantheism is essentially anti-theological within theology—a materialism within theology—and the result of its incompleteness is a move toward idealism. Idealism is speculative metaphysics, which is to say speculative theology; it is the complete realization and highest stage of theology. In speculative theology, God is pure reason and abstract spirit, which not only excludes all sensuousness and matter but dissolves them into the spirit of God, thereby making everything into God and making God the sole substance.
Hegel represents the highest stage of speculative metaphysics. In the Western metaphysical tradition, the material world is viewed as a soulless, dead shell, the antithesis of spirit. This theoretical tradition can be traced back to "Parmenidean-Platonic"ism. Parmenides distinguished between the path of truth ("that which is, is; that which is not, is not") and the path of opinion ("that which is, is not; that which is not, is"). The former leads to the metaphysical world of reason, while the latter is the sensuous world of reality. In Parmenides' view, only the metaphysical world is true "Being" [2], while the flux and motion of the sensible world merely represent error and opinion. Plato further developed this distinction, regarding the world of Forms (Ideas) as the true origin, while the real world is merely a participation in and imitation [3] of the Forms, establishing the metaphysical tradition where the world of Ideas is superior to and creates the sensible world. This theory reached its peak in Neoplatonism; Plotinus called the ultimate origin of the world "The One." "The One" is a perfect, eternal, and supreme metaphysical existence, and all things are emanations [4] of the highest Idea. This theory was the "prelude" to Christianity; Augustine said of him that by "changing a few words and phrases, he would become a Christian." Hegelian philosophy is the great synthesizer of the Christian spirit and speculative reason. In Hegel's view, the essence of the world is the "Concept," the self-movement and self-enrichment of the Absolute Spirit. The material world is understood as a stage of the alienation of the Absolute Spirit—a material world created by the Absolute Spirit in opposition to spirit in order to realize itself. It is the negative stage of the dialectic, whose fundamental purpose is the negation of the negation, namely, the return to the Absolute Spirit. Although Hegel acknowledges nature, the true "nature" is not the actual natural world, but the "spirit" behind nature—that is, the Philosophy of Nature. The natural world is nothing but a material shell, a "temporary lodging" carrying the Absolute Spirit. When the Absolute Spirit continues to develop, the natural world left behind is merely the "slough shed by a snake," a lifeless and dead product.
Addressing the current state of mutual fusion between speculative philosophy and religious theology, Feuerbach pointed out that "modern philosophy started from theology; it is itself nothing else but theology dissolved and transformed into philosophy." He believed that speculative theology packages itself as philosophy and uses "reason" to explain the world, yet its essence remains theology. The so-called "spirit" and "reason" are mere versions of God. Thus, Feuerbach aimed his spear directly at the synthesizer of speculative philosophy—Hegel. Feuerbach incisively pointed out the internal logical paradox of Hegelian philosophy: if one follows the interpretation of speculative philosophy—that spirit is the principle of the world, God is the origin of the world, and logic is the law of the world—then why does "Absolute Spirit" not remain in the "Elysium" of Ideas? "If the sensuous itself has no meaning at all, why then does the Idea need the sensuous?" That is to say, since the "Kingdom of Heaven" is itself the truth, why go through a redundant process of "negation"—negating oneself to move toward the "earthly world"? Feuerbach argued this is because "the reality of the Idea is the sensuous; but reality is the truth of the Idea, therefore the sensuous is the truth of the Idea... the reason it requires the realization and sensualization of thought is only because the reality belonging to thought—sensuousness—is unconsciously assumed to be a truth independent of thought." In other words, speculative philosophy denies the sensuous on one hand, yet cannot do without it on the other, because the sensuous alone is truth, reality, and substance. Thought is merely an abstraction; thought without the sensuous is nothing. Therefore, "only by giving to real and sensuous things an absolutely independent, divine, primary significance—not derived from the Idea—can the internal contradictions of speculative philosophy be dissolved."
Through the analysis of the internal contradictions of Hegel and the whole of idealist philosophy, Feuerbach not only exposed the inversion of the theological worldview but, more importantly, in his "negation of the negation" of idealism, he found the cornerstone and starting point of materialism—the "non-philosophy" within philosophy that had been despised and denied by speculative philosophy and the entire metaphysical tradition: the sensuous. "Only the objects of sensation, of intuition, of perception, are those which exist with direct and indubitable certainty." Feuerbach believed that philosophy "should not begin with itself, but with its opposite, with non-philosophy. This essence within us, distinct from thinking, non-philosophical, and absolutely anti-scholastic, is the principle of sensualism." On this basis, he established a materialistic worldview with the sensuous, the material, and the real as primary, thoroughly negating the abstract and speculative theological worldview, overturning the speculative metaphysical foundation upon which theology depends, and establishing a thorough atheistic worldview in naturalism.
Building upon the materialistic worldview, Feuerbach further criticized the philosophical premise of idealist epistemology—the identity of thinking and being. The dualistic split between thinking and being was the theoretical premise of modern epistemology. As Hegel pointed out, since Descartes proposed "Cogito, ergo sum," idealism has taken the "problem of the identity of thinking and being" as its fundamental question. "Thinking" and "being" in idealism are not real, sensuous existences, but heterogeneous abstract ideas. Idealism presupposes an abstract opposition between the two, thereby resorting to some transcendent "third party" to achieve dual identity; this reserved a "seat" for God. In idealism, God is synonymous with "identity." Feuerbach pointed out that the dualistic split between thinking and being is itself a "pseudo-proposition" of idealism. In the materialistic worldview, thinking is nothing but human thinking and human conscious activity, while being consists of concretely existing sensuous things; the two inherently possess identity. In his view, human thinking can grasp concrete things, and concrete things can be reflected by thinking. Thinking and being achieve intuitive unity within the human being. Therefore, there is no need to resort to any "God"; through one’s own "sensuous intuition," one can directly obtain objective and true knowledge, thereby removing the necessity and legitimacy of God in epistemology.
II. Atheism in Anthropology
In naturalism, Feuerbach conducted an "outward" critique of God, excluding the theoretical necessity of God from the material world external to man, eliminating the legitimacy of God's existence in worldview and epistemology, and establishing an atheistic worldview. Anthropology, however, is Feuerbach's "inward" critique. It takes the spiritual world internal to man as its object, specifically analyzing and criticizing the idea of God and the religious spirit. But as previously noted, Feuerbach called anthropology "idealism." Where did this judgment come from? How should it be understood? It must be explained by understanding the full content of his anthropology.
Objectification and alienation are the core concepts of Feuerbach’s atheism. In anthropology, Feuerbach distinguishes between the objectification and alienation of religion: the former is the confirmation and realization of the human essence, possessing positive significance and necessity; the latter is the negation and loss of the human essence, possessing negative significance and contingency.
"Object" (Gegenstand) is a key concept in German Classical Philosophy and a product of the expansion of subjectivity. In German Classical Philosophy, the object is understood as a subjective projection lacking reality; it was believed that the object cannot exist independently of the subject. This emphasized that the object exists as an object of the spirit—its content and significance are endowed by the spirit acting as the subject, serving as the spirit’s external manifestation and confirmation. Feuerbach transformed "objectivity" (Gegenständlichkeit) in Hegelian philosophy into "objectification" (Vergegenständlichung). Initially used to interpret the "object" within Hegel’s system, the concept of objectification moved beyond the Hegelian context following the founding of anthropological materialism, becoming a unique concept of anthropological atheism. Compared to German Classical Philosophy, anthropological objectification possesses three primary contents. First, based on a fundamental materialist standpoint, it opposes the theoretical logic of speculative philosophy and the reduction of all things to products of subjective objectification, emphasizing the objective reality of sensory things and the finitude of human subjectivity. Second, it emphasizes the specificity of the "religious object," holding that while "sensory objects exist outside of man, religious objects exist within man," and "the sensory object is an indifferent object in itself... but the object of religion is a selected object." That is to say, as a religious object, God differs from sensory things that possess objective reality; God is a subjective human creation who possesses no independence or reality in Himself, making Him subject to the theoretical logic of objectification. Third, it "reverses" the relationship between man and God, pointing out that it is not God who creates man, but man who creates God. In the relationship between the two, man is the subject and God is the object. On this basis, Feuerbach proposed the atheistic view of "religious objectification," noting that God is the object of man and the objectification of human essence. The essence of God is the essence of man; God Himself is merely a fictional concept created by man. As man's object and creation, God is the confirmation and realization of human essence. The perfect attributes of omniscience, omnipotence, and omnibenevolence carried by God fundamentally belong to man himself; man created God and objectified his own species-essence [5] within God. "The following proposition applies unconditionally: the object of man (i.e., the religious object—author's note) is nothing other than his own objectified essence."
The original meaning of alienation (Entfremdung) is "departure" or "detachment." Its use in philosophy can be traced back to the Middle Ages, where theology referred to humanity's betrayal of God as "alienation." Later, British and French political philosophers such as Hobbes and Rousseau used this concept to denote the loss or surrender of natural rights. It was German Classical Philosophy that elevated "alienation" to a general philosophical height. Fichte used the concept to explain how the "Non-I" serves both as the object of the "Self" and as its negation; Hegel used it to represent the dialectical unity of "spirit" and "matter." Feuerbach’s religious alienation is formulated in relation to religious objectification. Its basic connotation inherits from German Classical Philosophy, emphasizing that God, as man's object and creation, turns back to negate and despoil man. Feuerbach believed that in the process of religious development, the relationship between man and God was "inverted": "Man objectified himself, but did not recognize that the object was his own essence." In theology, God is no longer the objectification and confirmation of human essence; on the contrary, God exists independently of man as a transcendental, independent entity. In this "inverted" relationship, man is no longer the creator of God but has become God's slave; human essence, following the independence of God, becomes independent of man. This results, on the one hand, in God despoiling and appropriating man’s species-essence, turning it into a "divine essence" external to man. Man, having lost his species-essence, can only carry "original sin" and appeal to "divine" salvation, becoming the object of his own object. On the other hand, the man who has lost his species-essence becomes a self-interested "walking corpse," falling into endless strife and chaos. This result is religious alienation; it is God’s plunder and enslavement of man, and man’s self-loss and self-negation.
Based on religious objectification and alienation, Feuerbach grasped the duality of religion. On the one hand, he saw God as a product of human objectification; through this abstraction of God, man allows his species-essence to move from potentiality to reality. This is the manifestation and confirmation of human essence, containing positive content. On the other hand, he saw the alienation of human essence caused by God, which is the plunder and negation of human essence and an obstacle to man truly grasping his own nature. It is precisely because Feuerbach saw this inherent duality that, on one hand, regarding the oppression and exploitation of man by God, he advocated for the elimination of religious alienation. He believed that the elimination of God is both the condition and the result of the return of human essence—this is resolute atheism. On the other hand, regarding the content and spirit of religion, Feuerbach believed that "religion is the essence of humanity’s childhood: children see their own essence—man—outside of themselves." Although God is merely a "hallucination" from man's "childhood," and its form is abstract and illusory, the content it contains is human and real; it is the confirmation and manifestation of human essence. Therefore, Feuerbach advocated for the resolute elimination of God (the religion of God) while simultaneously preserving the religious spirit (the religion of man).
Precisely because Feuerbach preserved the positive dimension of religion and maintained his faith in and pursuit of abstract ideas such as "reason," "free will," and "love," and founded a "religion of love" based on human essence, he distanced himself from the ranks of "materialism." As mentioned previously, Feuerbach claimed that for him, "stepping forward is idealism." His purpose was specifically to preserve faith in and the pursuit of "the true, the good, and the beautiful." However, as Engels pointed out regarding this assertion: "Here, nothing more is done than to call the pursuit of ideal ends idealism." That is to say, whether in his physics or his anthropology, whether in his materialist worldview or his "religion of man," Feuerbach in fact maintained a materialist atheist standpoint, thoroughly excluding God from his theory. He mistakenly treated "reason," "free will," and "love" as concepts exclusive to idealism, and mistakenly viewed moral convictions and ideal pursuits as content unique to religion. This was essentially a "conceptual" confusion rather than an error of standpoint.
III. The Theoretical Significance of Feuerbach’s Atheism
Through the clarification above, it can be seen that Feuerbach’s atheism is not a simple "man is the essence of God," but a thorough atheistic thought that permeates his worldview, epistemology, and view of religion, possessing important theoretical value and practical significance.
From the perspective of its own theoretical value, compared to general atheism, Feuerbach’s atheism not only exposes the exploitative and false nature of theology from a theoretical height—making it a thorough atheism—but also unearths the latent positive dimensions in theology, making it a more dialectical atheism. In a horizontal comparison, Feuerbach possesses a higher theoretical level and richer content than 18th-century French atheism, and his attitude toward religious theology is more rational. In a vertical comparison, especially regarding his influence on Marx, Feuerbach’s atheism received direct affirmation and was drawn upon by the young Marx; the "theory of alienation" and the "method of inversion" therein were applied by Marx to political and economic critiques. Although Feuerbach’s atheism met with a "settling of accounts" [6] by Marx and Engels due to its own theoretical limitations, the intrinsic value of his atheistic thought and its value in the history of ideas as a bridge for the evolution of Marx and Engels' thought cannot be ignored. From the perspective of practical significance, Feuerbach’s atheism can inspire the construction of atheism in the New Era across both theoretical and practical dimensions.
First, from the perspective of the theory itself, compared to the passive view of general atheism which simply regards religious theology as a "fog of reason," Feuerbach views religious theology with a dialectical eye. Regarding the origin of religion, he affirms that religion is the confirmation and realization of human essence while simultaneously exposing the illusoriness of this "realization" itself. Feuerbach believed that "religion is man’s earliest and indirect self-consciousness." Although religious theology manifests in an illusory and external form, its essence remains human essence, albeit presented in an indirect form. "Religion is rooted in the essential difference between man and animals: animals have no religion," because animals do not possess species-consciousness [7] and cannot transcend their own finitude. Man not only possesses species-consciousness but is also able to exceed his own limits and objectify his essence; the result of this objectification of species-essence is religion. Simultaneously, Feuerbach pointed out that the indirectness of religion determines that it is, in the final analysis, not a true or effective mode of realization, but rather an illusory and "inverted" realization that instead leads to the loss of human essence. Regarding the vanishing of religion, he both clarified the necessity and reality of religion’s disappearance and preserved the positive factors within it. Feuerbach believed: "Christianity is nothing but a stubborn idea, an idea that stands in the sharpest contradiction to our fire and life insurance institutions, our railroads, our steam locomotives..." He discovered that with historical development and social progress—especially the continuous development of natural science and modern society—theism increasingly loses its realistic basis for existence, and the era of God ruling over man must come to an end. Yet, Feuerbach distinguished between the religion of man and the religion of God, advocating for the elimination of the alienated form of religion while preserving its objectified content, ultimately moving toward a religion of man and a religion of love.
Second, compared to 18th-century French atheism, Feuerbach’s atheism comprehensively surpasses it in theoretical depth, breadth of content, and critical attitude, pushing religious critique and atheism to a new theoretical peak. In terms of theoretical depth, French atheism simply appealed to scientific theory and a materialist standpoint to struggle against theology in a "counter-active" manner; it could not provide a fundamental or theoretical subversion of theology and idealism. Feuerbach stood upon the entire tradition of Western speculative metaphysics, taking its most complete expression—Hegel—as his direct object of critique. Using the internal theoretical contradictions of speculative philosophy as a breakthrough point, he dismantled the rationality of idealism and theology from within and established a sensuous (sensationalist) philosophical foundation. He thus thoroughly overturned the theoretical roots of theology, representing an atheistic thought more thorough and profound than that of the French atheists. In terms of breadth, Feuerbach’s atheism permeates his worldview, epistemology, and view of religion; he excluded God from worldview and epistemology from a theoretical and philosophical height, and applied anthropological analysis and critique to the origin, content, and demise of religion—something French atheism lacked. Regarding his critical attitude toward religion, French atheism engaged in a wholesale negation, adopting extreme theoretical claims that theology was merely a case of "a fool meeting a liar," failing to see the internal rational factors and positive dimensions of religious theology. Feuerbach, based on the objectification and alienation of "human essence," dialectically grasped the dual significance of religion. He saw both the oppression and exploitation of man by theology and the internal rationality of the religious spirit; he revealed the inverted essence of religion while extracting from it the essence and meaning of man.
From a vertical perspective, Feuerbach’s atheism influenced the development of Marx's thought to a great extent, which is the concentrated manifestation of its significance in the history of ideas. Specifically, Feuerbach’s atheism ran through the entire process of the birth of historical materialism—from being initially accepted and applied by the young Marx, to being continuously advanced and deepened by Marx, and finally reaching the "settling of accounts" that led toward historical materialism. In the evolutionary journey of Marx’s thought, Feuerbach’s atheism went from receiving "praise" at the beginning to suffering "critique" at the end. This process fully reflects the important significance of Feuerbach’s atheism in the history of ideas, while the content inherited and sublated [8] by Marx fully reflects its profound theoretical value.
First, Feuerbach's atheistic stance and humanistic perspective were highly endorsed and fully absorbed by the young Marx, becoming powerful weapons in the latter's polemics. In On the Jewish Question, responding to Bruno Bauer’s reduction of the "Jewish question" to a religious issue and his attempt to resolve antagonism through religious means, Marx pointed out: "How can the religious antagonism be made impossible? By abolishing religion." Addressing the "Christian state" proposed by Bauer, Marx criticized its "alienated" essence, noting that "the religious anticipation, the religious dream, the religious postulate of the sovereignty of man—man as an alien being different from the real man"—means that the rights "realized" by the Christian state are fundamentally illusory and inverted realizations. The Christian state itself is the manifestation of religious alienation. Building upon Feuerbach's humanism, Marx proposed the "democratic state," arguing that "the democratic state, the real state, does not need religion for its political completion," and that "the basis of such a state is not Christianity, but the human basis of Christianity." Marx carried out Feuerbach’s atheistic stance by opposing one-sided and incomplete atheism: "Even if man has already through the medium of the state announced himself as an atheist—that is, he has announced the state as an atheist—he is still under the spell of religion, precisely because he recognizes himself only by a roundabout route, only through a medium." Marx advocated for the realization of thorough atheism. The Holy Family further embodies Marx's application of Feuerbach's atheistic thought; Marx stated directly: "Feuerbach... completed the criticism of religion by having sketched in grand and masterly outlines the criticism of Hegel's speculation and hence of all metaphysics." As Engels noted in Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy: "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."
Second, Feuerbach’s atheistic ideas and methods were advanced and deepened by Marx, moving beyond the sphere of religious criticism into political and economic research. In A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, Marx employed Feuerbach's "transformative method" [9] to discover the "mystical" essence of Hegel’s philosophy of right, pointing out the abstract and inverted nature of his "state." He advocated for "true democracy"—a political system based on real, sensuous human beings—which is an expression of Feuerbachian humanism. In the "Introduction" to A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, Marx fully affirmed Feuerbach's atheistic view: "The basis of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man." He further developed Feuerbach’s atheism, putting forward the thesis that "religion is the opium of the people." On the theoretical foundation of Feuerbachian atheism, Marx extended religious alienation into the realm of political criticism, describing the illusory realization of human essence by the political state as "the self-alienation of the unholy forms" or "alienation in this-world." He noted: "Once the holy form of human self-alienation has been unmasked, the next task of philosophy, which is in the service of history, is to unmask self-alienation in its unholy forms. Thus the criticism of heaven turns into the criticism of earth, the criticism of religion into the criticism of law, and the criticism of theology into the criticism of politics." In the Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, Marx likewise affirmed Feuerbach’s atheistic achievements, crediting him with "founding true materialism and real science." The core theory therein—the "theory of alienated labor"—pushed the critique of alienation deep into economics, frequently drawing direct analogies between alienated labor and religious alienation: "The more the worker spends himself, the more powerful becomes the alien world of objects which he creates over against himself... It is the same in religion. The more man puts into God, the less he retains in himself." Furthermore, discussions on socialism also fully reflect Feuerbach’s naturalistic materialistic atheistic worldview: "The essentiality of man and nature... has become practically, sensuously perceptible... and therefore the question about an alien being, about a being above nature and man... has become impossible in practice."
Finally, the reckoning [10] with Feuerbach’s atheistic thought by Marx and Engels was a vital link in the formation of the historical materialist conception of history. In the "Feuerbach" chapter of The German Ideology, Marx and Engels arrived at a more scientific understanding of religious theology based on historical materialism: "starting out from the material production of life itself to set forth the real process of production, and to comprehend the form of intercourse connected with this and created by this mode of production (i.e., civil society in its various stages) as the basis of all history; and to explain the different theoretical products and forms of consciousness, religion, philosophy, ethics, etc., etc., and trace their origins and growth from that basis." In other words, Marx and Engels believed that religious theology is a product of history and a result of human material productive activity; it should not be understood through abstract concepts like "human essence" or "objectification," but through real, historical praxis. Regarding the alienation of religion, Marx and Engels explained it through the "division of labor," noting that "philosophers have conceived as an ideal, under the name of 'Man', the individuals who were no longer subject to the division of labor... and in this way they have conceived the whole process of development as the evolutionary process of 'Man'... This whole process was thus conceived as a process of the self-alienation of 'Man'." Proceeding from real revolutionary praxis, Marx and Engels argued that "the driving force of history, also of religion, philosophy and all other types of theory, is not criticism but revolution." Although Feuerbachian atheism was critiqued by the more scientific Marxist view of religion and atheism following the establishment of historical materialism, its thorough materialistic atheistic stance, rich atheistic worldview, theoretical innovations regarding religious objectification and alienation, dialectical attitude toward religious criticism, and its actual influence on the evolution of Marx’s thought all demonstrate its profound theoretical value and significance in the history of ideas.
In terms of practical significance, the unique philosophical perspectives and theoretical characteristics of Feuerbachian atheism possess a value that transcends his era, capable of inspiring the disciplinary development of atheism and atheistic publicity and education in the New Era. Overall, Feuerbach’s atheism encompasses both theoretical and practical dimensions, corresponding respectively to the levels of atheistic disciplinary construction and atheistic publicity/education.
In the theoretical dimension—namely atheistic disciplinary construction—Feuerbach’s atheism exhibits three inspiring characteristics. First is the combination of the justification of atheism with the falsification of theism. The thoroughness of Feuerbach’s atheism is not limited to holding a firm atheistic position but is also reflected in the thorough critique of theism and religious theology. As noted earlier, Feuerbach’s materialism is built upon the critique and inversion of speculative metaphysics; it is a materialism that grew out of the internal theoretical contradictions of idealism, representing a fusion of the critique of theism and the establishment of atheism. Second is the characteristic of contextual innovation. The reason Feuerbach's critique of religion became a peak of modern atheism and received full affirmation from Marx and Engels lies in his refusal to be confined to traditional Western metaphysical contexts. He stepped outside the idealistic discourse system based on the Cartesian cogito to construct a materialistic discourse centered on "sensuousness," "sensuous man," and "sensuous intuition." Third is the characteristic of fully affirming human value. Compared to mechanical materialism, which reduced man to a "machine," Feuerbach pointed out: "Our task consists precisely in proving that the antithesis of divine and human is altogether illusory." That is to say, the fundamental aim of Feuerbachian atheism was not to reduce man to "matter," but to reclaim human value and meaning from the hands of God; respect for and recognition of "man" and "human nature" constitute its theoretical palette.
In the practical dimension—namely atheistic educational praxis—Feuerbachian atheism offers three points of enlightenment. First, it is essential to continuously strengthen the publicity and education of atheism and proactively contest the ideological high ground against theism. Feuerbach noted that although Christianity no longer possessed its medieval authority in practice, it remained hidden in people’s concepts in a philosophical form, with the mists of idealism still shrouding the spiritual world; this underscores the importance of education and publicity. Second, one must adopt a scientific and dialectical attitude toward theism. Unlike the one-sided negation of theism found in naive atheism, Feuerbach distinguished between religious objectification and religious alienation, acknowledging the internally rational aspects of religion. This is not a compromise with theism but an effort to understand it correctly and excavate its rational elements, thereby thoroughly transcending theism theoretically and enriching atheistic thought. Finally, manifesting human power through praxis is the fundamental path to promoting atheism. Feuerbach believed that the reason humans lose their essence is precisely because their own power is too weak, forcing them to resort to some illusory transcendent being to satisfy the need for self-actualization—albeit in an inverted and alienated form. As productive forces continue to develop, as science and technology innovate, and as material and spiritual life become increasingly abundant, human power and value will be continuously enriched and manifested. Humans will then be able to fully recognize and affirm themselves, further developing their own powers. The more humans gain, the less is left for God; the illusory nature of theism becomes increasingly prominent, and atheism sinks deeper into the hearts of the people.
(Author: Zhang Qinmin, Master’s student, Department of Philosophy, School of Marxism, Jiangsu Normal University) Online Editor: Tong Xin Source: Science and Atheism, Issue 1, 2025