Recently, I listened to the first several episodes of a fantastic new podcast by Justin Brierley called The Surprising Rebirth of Belief in God. I strongly recommend the podcast. In the podcast (which is inspired by a book with the same title), Brierley discusses the state of Anglo-American atheism today. The big takeaway is that the big, bad New Atheists (think Dawkins and Hitchens) have lost their cultural relevance. In fact, they were only really relevant for just over ten years, and they have now been supplanted by different types of unbelievers.
The result is that the shape of atheism is much different today than it was 5-10 years ago. Brierley argues that we have entered into a time where belief in God is being reconsidered and reborn in places where that belief was not too long ago mockingly dismissed. Stories like the recent conversion of former atheist Ayaan Ali provide anecdotal support for this idea.
The podcast is a reminder that atheism is not some monolithic thing. Different types of unbelief, just like different types of belief, come into, and go out of, style. To put it another way, not every person who claims atheism believes the same things or sees the world in the same way. I believe that there are at least six different types of atheists.[1] They all share skepticism about God’s existence, but they differ on the implications of that skepticism. There is a “what now?” aspect of skepticism. Once you abandon belief in God, you are left wondering what comes next. It’s in this respect where atheists differ.
1. The Evangelical
The evangelical atheist is the unbeliever who has made atheism a key element of their identity and personality. The New Atheists fit into this category. They were not satisfied with a private atheism; they were evangelical in the certainty of their unbelief. The New Atheists were transparently religious in their irreligion. Atheism was an organized movement complete with anti-conversion rallies, conferences, sacred texts, and hierarchies (with people like Dawkins at the very top).
Most of these evangelicals were unflinchingly aggressive and proud of their atheism (especially online), employing mocking condescension toward all religious belief. I use the past tense here not because evangelical atheism no longer exists but because it has largely lost its cultural power. Evangelical atheism burned very bright, but like a lot of things that burn bright, it eventually burned out. It’s hard to retain evangelical fervor and excitement for an aggressive non-belief. New Atheism became old and dull. Their arguments were full of rhetorical flourish but were ultimately lacking intellectual rigor. The “reason” that they celebrated was mostly bluster.
“Evangelical atheism burned very bright, but like a lot of things that burn bright, it eventually burned out.”
2. The Humanist
These atheists have been around longer than the evangelical atheists, and they will continue to be around after the evangelicals have faded away. Their staying power is largely due to the fact that atheism is not their entire personality. They assume atheism, but rather than making converts, they are more interested in making the world a better place. If there’s no God, after all, then it is up to us to save ourselves. The humanist typically possesses an almost religious hope in reason, science, technology, and bureaucracy. The humanist has a particular anthropology that sees human beings as both the cause of and solution to all of life’s problems.
3. The Activist
Brierley’s podcast makes a convincing case that this group of atheists hastened the destruction of New Atheism. New Atheists saw themselves as prophets of reason and science. Those prophets were mostly white, heterosexual, middle-aged men. Such a movement is doomed to cancellation in today’s progressive climate. Progressive, woke atheists tend to be younger and allied with marginalized groups (read non-white, non-male, non-heterosexual). They are much less concerned about things like science and reason. They aren’t interested in refuting theistic proofs or evidence for the resurrection. Instead, they are concerned about justice.
The activist atheist doesn’t hate religion because it is unreasonable. The activist atheist hates religion because it fosters all sorts of -phobias and racism. (I witnessed this change personally in many of the atheists that I follow on social media. Many of them gradually stopped talking about God and instead turned their attention exclusively to LGBT rights and the evils of the Republican party.) Humanists and activists differ in that humanists generally want a new world to emerge through human progress while these new activists generally want to tear down the world and build a new one in its place (assuming that they’ve even thought about the type of world they want to create through their activism.)
“Humanists and activists differ in that humanists generally want a new world to emerge through human progress while these new activists generally want to tear down the world and build a new one in its place.”
4. The Hedonist
The hedonist atheist is more common than the previous three. The hedonist atheist is the person who lives life seeking after pleasure and happiness. This doesn’t necessarily mean they’re pursuing a self-destructive and decadent form of pleasure. Often times, the hedonist atheist will say that what brings their life meaning is their family or their work or “just living a good life.” They aren’t concerned about changing the world either through activism or humanism. They are more concerned about just getting through the day and minding their own business. In many cases, the hedonist is fine with other people possessing religious faith as long as they keep it to themselves and don’t cram it down anyone’s throat. In this way, the hedonist will often be relativistic about things like faith and morality.
5. The Christian Atheist
I’ve called these people “Front Porch Christians” because they live under the shelter of Christian belief without going all the way into the house. “Christian atheist” is a title borrowed from British journalist Douglas Murray. Murray is one of a growing number of atheists pointing out that liberal society assumes a Christian foundation. Tom Holland, Jonathan Haidt, Jordan Peterson, and perhaps Ayaan Ali fit into this category. These are people who have yet to personally believe in the truth of the gospel, but nevertheless they recognize that there is something about the gospel that is essential. Secularism does not provide a strong enough foundation for a civilization. It also doesn’t provide a durable meaning for a person’s individual life.
Haidt, in his book The Righteous Mind, recognizes the importance of religion in ways that the New Atheists would never dream of acknowledging.
“Asking people to give up all forms of sacralized belonging and live in a world of purely ‘rational’ beliefs might be like asking people to give up the Earth and live in colonies orbiting the moon. It can be done, but it would take a great deal of careful engineering, and even after ten generations, the descendants of those colonists might find themselves with inchoate longings for gravity and greenery.”
To the humanist and to the activist, the Christian atheist asks what informs our understanding of progress or justice. How does secularism account for something like human rights? To the hedonist, the Christian atheist asks how a godless universe really provides any transcendent meaning for a person’s life. The Christian atheists are emerging from the dead husk of the New Atheists and the destructive nihilism of the activists and are wrestling with the implications of the death of God. This is still a small number of people, but it’s growing. What the Christian atheist must discover is that Christianity is more than merely useful; it is true. In fact, it is only because it is true that it is useful.
“What the Christian atheist must discover is that Christianity is more than merely useful; it is true. In fact, it is only because it is true that it is useful.”
6. The Apathyist (The Atheist Christian)
This is by far the largest group of people. In many ways, they look like the hedonist except many in this category would actually say they believe in God. They may even claim to be Christian, but this belief has zero impact on their lives. They believe in God; they just don’t care. God is distant and unknowable, so why worry about him or even think about him? They are practically atheist.
Many in this category would be what Ryan Burge labels “nones.” They have no religious affiliation, commitment, or beliefs. The apathyist hasn’t considered many of the deep questions of life. When he is pressed on these questions, he often gives wildly contradictory and completely unjustified answers. This isn’t because he’s dumb but because he hasn’t really thought about those questions. He’s irreligious, so it doesn’t really dawn on him that he would need to think about religious questions.
In my experience, this is the hardest group to engage. At least atheists are eager to talk about God. They care. The apathyist has to be talked into caring which is a challenging thing to do. Everything in our daily lives is designed to shield us from thinking about things that matter. We are conditioned to move from distraction to distraction without reflection or consideration. We may even resent a person who interrupts our distraction with an uncomfortable question about life’s meaning or the existence of God.
[1] If you’re interested in a more academic treatment of this topic, there is a helpful little book called Seven Types of Atheism.
From chadragsdale.wordpress.com. Used with permission.
