Seven Types of Atheism

Written by John Gray

Narrated by James Langton

From the provocative author of Straw Dogs comes an incisive, surprising intervention in the political and scientific debate over religion and atheism

When you explore older atheisms, you will find that some of your firmest convictions―secular or religious―are highly questionable. If this prospect disturbs you, what you are looking for may be freedom from thought.

For a generation now, public debate has been corroded by a shrill, narrow derision of religion in the name of an often vaguely understood “science.” John Gray’s stimulating and enjoyable new book, Seven Types of Atheism, describes the complex, dynamic world of older atheisms, a tradition that is, he writes, in many ways intertwined with and as rich as religion itself.

Along a spectrum that ranges from the convictions of “God-haters” like the Marquis de Sade to the mysticism of Arthur Schopenhauer, from Bertrand Russell’s search for truth in mathematics to secular political religions like Jacobinism and Nazism, Gray explores the various ways great minds have attempted to understand the questions of salvation, purpose, progress, and evil. The result is a book that sheds an extraordinary light on what it is to be human.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Brilliance Audio
• Release date: Dec 18, 2018
• ISBN: 9781978644151

John Gray

John Gray is the author of many critically acclaimed books, including The Silence of Animals, The Immortalization Commission, Black Mass, and Straw Dogs. A regular contributor to The New York Review of Books, he has been a professor of politics at Oxford, a visiting professor at Harvard and Yale, and a professor of European thought at the London School of Economics. He now writes full-time.

Reviews for Seven Types of Atheism

[steve02476 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

I wrote this in 2018:

In Jan 2020 I tried again and made it through this small book. Still didn’t like it very much. Author clearly knows a lot about religion, history, and literature. I confess, I’m not well educated in these areas. He describes atheism as if it were basically another sort of religion, he thinks it’s a sort of a misdirected monotheism. I’m sure some people treat it that way, but it seems like a strange approach. He discusses many famous people who describe themselves as atheists, or he describes them as atheists. But his deep dives into their personalities and motivations doesn’t convince me that their approaches to atheism reflect the realities of common run-of-the-mill people who are atheists.

The book did make me think more about the relationship between belief in god and participation in a religious group - obviously not a strictly 1:1 relationship.

[William Eichorst · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

An absolute brilliant read/listen. Questioned the validity and usefulness of modern day “new atheism”, as well as drawing comparison between ancient theological movements and modern secular equivalents.

[Michael · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Bit of a dry survey of different philosophers approach to atheism but I didn't get a good sense of what the Seven Types of Atheism actually mean.

[akblanchard_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

According to author John Gray, there are seven different varieties of atheism, but only two of them work as something more than warmed-over monotheism. The so-called "new" atheism of Richard Dawkins et. al, is beneath his contempt, and secular humanism's naive emphasis on humanity's continual improvement through history makes no sense to him. To Gray, it is similarly pointless to put one's faith in science or in apocalyptic political movements. In the book's most drawn-out chapter, Gray writes of about the essential religiosity of philosophers (like de Sade) who claim to be angry at God. Only the last two forms of atheism, "Atheism without Progress" and "The Atheism of Silence", influenced as they are by Schopenhauer and Spinoza, have the pedigree and intellectual heft Gray requires. For all its erudition, this brief, opinionated field guide is surprisingly engaging. Recommended to readers who are interested in the topic.

[tytania-2 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

I liked this book for its main idea, more than for its writing or details, which frankly were often over my head.The main idea is one I've tried to fully form in my head many a time, about progress being a myth. Gray argues here that much of modern atheism, notably secular humanism, is wholly religious in nature, and owes its existence to monotheism and Christianity.Prior to Christianity, so it goes, the ancients had no concept of a grand narrative of human progress. Things were seen as cyclical. Humans progressed, and then fell back as often as not. Knowledge was gained and lost. There was nothing new under the sun.Pow! Here comes Christianity. Now history becomes a story of before and after, human striving serving an ultimate purpose.Whereas Christianity is what lent humanity the idea of salvation and progression, what monotheism brought to the table was universalism. No longer would I worship my local gods and you yours; not even would it be the case that I would worship my "God" and you yours. No, now there was ONLY ONE god - for EVERYONE. From here arose the tendency of humans not just to conquer, not just to impose their physical will on others, but to insist on imposing their very morality and religion on others, which was something new.There is a lot in this book about the religious nature of so-called atheistic movements - Bolshevism, Naziism, and lots of obscure movements and tyrants that I for one don't think had I ever heard of - "Bockelson" or "John of Leiden," for example, an Anabaptist from the 16th century, made for a particularly gruesome digression. Gray seems to almost delight in ticking off atrocities committed throughout the ages by the religious and allegedly areligious alike. I could have done without it.This world view of life as cyclical and non-improving is one that resonates with me, and though I usually think of it on the micro rather than macro scale, it seems to fit the facts well enough on both levels. I feel exactly like the four-year-old child I once was. True, I used to be two feet tall, and now I am five foot four. Is that "progress"? I am better now at follow spelling rules. I’ve amassed some knowledge. Progress can only be proven on trivial levels such as this. In so many more senses, I am the same.Similarly, you cannot deny that humans own more cell phones now than ever before, certainly more than in the 15th century. It's a fact. Is that progress? We’ve managed to amass technical knowledge, and not yet lose it, though there is no guarantee we won’t lose it all somewhere down the line. But despots and intolerance continue to rule as much of the globe as they ever did. I won’t bog down in a scorecard of what ways we’ve progressed and what ways we haven’t – ultimately, I’m not here to convert you, and neither is Gray. One of the types of atheism he semi-ridicules is that which does nothing but position itself in opposition to religion. Religion is part of human nature; why single it out for opposition? Science and religion are not opposites or opposed to each other any more than are science and art. Do scientists seek to stamp out art? Why not? So, why try to stamp out religion? Think about it. And if you are a secular humanist, and your “religion” is that of human progress, then good for you. Different people can have different religions and moralities. We very likely need them, and have them for a purpose.