Atheism

"Atheist" redirects here. For the band, see [[:Atheist (band)]].

Atheism, in its broadest sense, is a lack of belief in a deity or deities. The opposite of theism, this broad definition encompasses both people who assert that there are no gods and those who make no claim about whether gods exist or not. Narrower definitions of atheism typically include only those who assert the nonexistence of gods, excluding non-believing agnostics and other non-theists.

Although some atheists tend toward skepticism, and toward secular philosophies such as humanism, naturalism and materialism, there is no single system of philosophy which all atheists share, nor does atheism have institutionalized rituals or behaviors.

Etymology

In early Ancient Greek, the adjective atheos (from privative α- + θεος 'god') meant 'without gods' or 'lack of belief in gods'. The word acquired an additional meaning in the 5th century BC, severing relations with the gods; that is, 'denying the gods, godless, ungodly', with more active connotations than asebēs, or impious. Modern translations of classical texts sometimes translate atheos as 'atheistic'. As an abstract noun, there was also atheotēs: 'atheism'. Cicero transliterated atheos into Latin. The debate concerning early atheism was transformed in the debate between early Christians and pagans, with both sides attributing it in the pejorative sense to the other.

A.B. Drachmann (1922) notes:

Atheism and atheist are words formed from Greek roots and with Greek derivative endings. Nevertheless they are not Greek; their formation is not consonant with Greek usage. In Greek they said atheos and atheotes; to these the English words ungodly and ungodliness correspond rather closely. In exactly the same way as ungodly, atheos was used as an expression of severe censure and moral condemnation; this use is an old one, and the oldest that can be traced. Not till later do we find it employed to denote a certain philosophical creed.

In English, the term atheism was adopted from the French athéisme in about 1587. The term atheist in the sense of 'one who denies or disbelieves' predates atheism in English, being first attested in about 1571; the phrase Italian atheoi is recorded as early as 1568. Atheist in the sense of practical godlessness was first attested in 1577. The French word is derived from athée (godless or atheist), which in turn comes from the Greek atheos. The words deist and theist entered English after atheism, being first attested in 1621 and 1662, respectively, and followed by theism and deism in 1678 and 1682, respectively. Deism and theism changed meanings slightly around 1700, due to the influence of atheism. Deism was originally used as a synonym for today's theism, but came to denote a separate philosophical doctrine.

The Oxford English Dictionary also records an earlier, irregular formation, atheonism, dated from about 1534. The later and now obsolete words athean and atheal are dated to 1611 and 1612, respectively.

History

Main article: History of atheism

Although the term itself originated in 16th-century France, ideas that would today be recognized as atheistic existed before the advent of Classical Antiquity. Epicurus proposed theories that included a lack of belief in an afterlife, though he remained ambiguous on the existence of deities. Before him, Socrates was sentenced to death partly on the grounds that he was guilty of impiety by denying the existence of the gods, although he did express belief in several forms of divinity, as recorded in Plato's Apology. The criminal connotation attached to atheistic ideas would long remain. A "wrong belief" might be equated with "unbelief" and condemn even those deeply committed to a god as "atheists."

By the late 20th century, atheism had become common in some countries along with the rationalist movement and secular humanism, particularly among scientists. Some Communist states, such as the USSR, promoted atheism; Enver Hoxha went further and banned religion in Albania. This helps reinforce some of the negative connotations concerning atheism, especially where anti-communist sentiment is widespread. In the United States, the term became synonymous with being unpatriotic ('godless commie') during the Cold War.

Demographics

Main article: Demographics of atheism

The percentage of people in European countries who said in 2005 that they believe in a god.

It is difficult to quantify the number of atheists in the world. Different people interpret "atheist" and related terms differently, and it can be hard to draw boundaries between atheism, non-religious beliefs, and non-theistic religious and spiritual beliefs. Furthermore, atheists lack a unified belief system and may suffer from social stigma, discrimination, and persecution in certain regions.

Despite these problems, atheism is known to be more common in Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, former and present Communist states, and to a lesser extent, the United States. A 1995 survey attributed to the Encyclopædia Britannica indicates that the non-religious make up about 14.7% of the world's population, and atheists around 3.8%.

Reasons for atheism

Atheists assert various reasons for their position, including a lack of empirical evidence for deities, or the conviction that the non-existence of deities (in general or particular) is better supported rationally.

Lack of reason or default position

The simplest reason atheists give for not being theists is simply that they remain unconvinced by theistic arguments. Many atheists will point out that a lack of belief in something is the philosophical default position, and that many atheists at no time in their lives believed in god and simply have never encountered a good reason to begin doing so. They maintain that it is the burden of the believer to support his or her belief, not the other way around. This applies to the broader definition of atheism given above. The narrower definition of atheism is a particular belief, not a lack of belief.

Philosophical and logical reasons

Some atheists argue that their position is based on a more active logical analysis, and subsequent rejection, of theistic claims. The arguments against the existence of deities aim at showing that some particular conception of a god either is inherently meaningless, contradictory, or contradicts known scientific or historical facts, and that therefore a god thus described does not exist.

"Within the framework of scientific rationalism one arrives at the belief in the nonexistence of God, not because of certain knowledge, but because of a sliding scale of methods. At one extreme, we can confidently rebut the personal Gods of creationists on firm empirical grounds: science is sufficient to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that there never was a worldwide flood and that the evolutionary sequence of the Cosmos does not follow either of the two versions of Genesis. The more we move toward a deistic and fuzzily defined God, however, the more scientific rationalism reaches into its toolbox and shifts from empirical science to logical philosophy informed by science. Ultimately, the most convincing arguments against a deistic God are Hume's dictum and Occam's razor. These are philosophical arguments, but they also constitute the bedrock of all of science, and cannot therefore be dismissed as non-scientific. The reason we put our trust in these two principles is because their application in the empirical sciences has led to such spectacular successes throughout the last three centuries."

Other arguments include:

• The problem of evil, which Christian apologist William Lane Craig has called atheism's killer argument. The argument is that the presence of evil in the world disproves the existence of any god that is simultaneously benevolent and omnipotent, because any benevolent god would want to eliminate evil, and any omnipotent god would be able to do so.

• The related argument from nonbelief, also known as the argument from divine hiddenness, states that if an omnipotent god existed and wanted to be believed and praised by all, it would prove its existence because it would invariably be able to do so. Since there are unbelievers, either no god exists or no god influences mankind. Either way, belief in such a god is not required.

• Theological noncognitivism which is the argument that religious language, and specifically words like "God" (capitalized), are not cognitively meaningful.

• The Transcendental argument for the non-existence of God (TANG) was first intended as a reply to the Transcendental argument for the existence of God, which argues that logic, science and morality can only be justified by appealing to the theistic worldview. TANG, however, argues that the reverse is true.

• Nearly all cultures have their own creation myths and gods. Claiming that a certain god (such as Yahweh, Zeus, etc.) has a special status above gods of other cultures that are now accepted as myth is illogical. The Abarahamic God in reality has no special status over Zeus or any other god.

Scientific reasons

Science is based on the observation that the universe is governed by natural laws that can be tested and replicated through experiment. It serves as a reliable and rational basis for predictions and engineering. Like scientists, scientific skeptics use critical thinking (cf. the true-believer syndrome) to decide claims based on verifiability and falsifiability. They do not claims that rely on faith or other unfalsifiable categories.

Most theistic religions teach that mankind and the universe were created by one or more deities and that this deity continues to act in the universe. Many people, including atheists and theists, feel that this view conflicts with both the discoveries of modern science (especially in cosmology, astronomy, biology and quantum physics) and the fundamental principles of science - that science and theistic religions are mutually exclusive philosophies. Many believers in the validity of science, seeing such a contradiction, do not believe the existence of a deity or deities actively involved in the universe.

Science presents a vastly different view of humankind's place in the Universe from many theistic religions. For example, evolutionary science describes how complex life has developed through a process of natural selection acting on random mutations; it asserts that all species of life on this planet, including humans, are products of this stochastic process. Modern humans have existed only for the last 0.0015% (approximately 200,000 years) of the age of the universe, on a planet that orbits an undistinguished star among billions in the Milky Way, which itself is merely one galaxy among billions of others. It is also now known that humans share 98% of our genetic code with bonobo chimpanzees, 90% with mice, 21% with roundworms, and fully 7% with the bacterium E. coli. This scientific perspective is quite different from that of most theistic religions. In some Abrahamic religions, for instance, humans are thought to be created 'in God's image' and to be qualitatively different than the 'beasts of the Earth.'

Scientific progress has, some claim, continually eroded the basis for religion. Historically, many religions have involved supernatural entities and forces linked to unexplained physical phenomena. In Ancient Greece, for instance, Helios was the god of the sun, Zeus the god of thunder, and Poseidon the god of earthquakes and the sea. In the absence of a credible scientific theory, people attributed these natural objects and phenomenons to supernatural forces. Science has been eliminating the need for such explanations. The idea that the role of deities is to fill in the remaining "gaps" in scientific understanding has come to be known as God of the gaps.

Personal and social reasons

Some atheists have found social, psychological, practical, and other personal reasons for their beliefs. Some believe that it is more conducive to living well, or that it is more ethical and has more utility than theism. Such atheists hold that searching for explanations in natural science is more beneficial than doing it through supernatural means. Atheism allows, perhaps even requires, people to take personal responsiblity for their actions. In contrast, many religions blame bad deeds on extrinsic factors and require scare tactics and blind faith to keep a person moral and socially acceptable.

Some atheists find it difficult to accept that faith could be more important than good works: While a murderer can go to heaven simply by accepting Jesus in certain Christian sects, a farmer in a remote Asian countryside will go to hell for not hearing the "good news". Furthermore, some find hell to be the epitome of cruel and unusual punishment, and some may find the knowledge of such a place to be unbearable even if they themselves can go to heaven.

Some atheists argue that theism eases one's conscience or can promote immorality. Much violence -- e.g., warfare, executions, murders and terrorism -- has been brought about, condoned or justified by religious beliefs and practices. The wealth of various religious organizations also often specifically contravenes the teachings of the founders of their religion, and may be inseparable from the nature of the organization itself.

Just as some people of faith come to their faith based upon perceived spiritual or religious experiences, some atheists base their view on an absence of such an experience. Although they may not foreclose the possibility of a supernatural world, unless and until they believe through experience that such a world exists they refuse to accept a belief system based upon blind faith.

Some atheists grow up in environments where atheism is relatively common, just as people who grow up in a predominantly Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, or Christian country or culture tend to adopt the prevalent religion there. Also, some believe that religions have been socially constructed and should be analyzed with an objective, historic viewpoint (see development of religion).

Types and typologies of atheism

There are many discrepancies in the use of terminology between proponents and opponents of atheism, and even divergent definitions among those who share near-identical beliefs.

Atheism as absence of theism

The terms implicit atheism and explicit atheism were coined by George H. Smith. Implicit atheism is defined by Smith as 'the absence of theistic belief without a conscious rejection of it:

"The man who is unacquainted with theism is an atheist because he does not believe in a god. This category would also include the child without the conceptual capacity to grasp the issues involved, but who is still unaware of those issues. The fact that this child does not believe in god qualifies him as an atheist."

In accordance, Baron d'Holbach defines atheism in a similar way, making the definition so broad as to incorporate those of no knowledge.

"All children are born Atheists; they have no idea of God."

An atheist writer who disagrees with such a broad definition is Ernest Nagel, who thinks atheism is the rejection of theism (George H. Smith defined as explicit atheism, or anti-theism):

"Atheism is not to be identified with sheer unbelief... Thus, a child who has received no religious instruction and has never heard about God, is not an atheist — for he is not denying any theistic claims."

Weak and strong atheism

Main articles: Weak atheism and Strong atheism

Weak atheism, or negative atheism, is the lack of belief in the existence of deities. It does not imply strong atheism, which asserts that no deities exist. Weak atheists generally find a lack or absence of evidence justifying belief in any deity. They occupy a range of positions that entail non-belief, disbelief, and doubt of theism.

Strong or positive atheism is the philosophical position that no deity exists. It is a form of explicit atheism, consciously rejecting theism. A strong atheist may go further and claim that the existence of certain deities is logically impossible.

While the terms weak and strong are relatively recent, the concepts they represent have been in use for some time. In earlier philosophical publications, the terms negative atheism and positive atheism were more common.

Ignosticism

Main article: Ignosticism

Ignosticism is the view that the question of the existence of gods is meaningless and should be ignored because it has no verifiable or testable consequences (see scientific method). The term was coined by Rabbi Sherwin Wine, founder of the Society for Humanistic Judaism. Ignosticism is often considered synonymous with theological noncognitivism. It is a popular view among many logical positivists such as Rudolph Carnap and A. J. Ayer, who hold that talk of gods is literally nonsense. According to ignostics, 'Does God exist?' has the same logical status as 'What colour is Saturday?' because neither has any meaningful answer.

Ignosticism is distinct from apatheism. While ignostics hold questions and discussions of whether deities exist to be meaningless, apatheists hold that even a hypothetical answer to such questions would be completely irrelevant to human existence.

Agnosticism

Main article: Agnosticism

Agnosticism is the philosophical view that the existence or nonexistence of the supernatural or the divine is inherently unknowable. Therefore, the existence of such powers as deities in our universe is irrelevant to the human condition. The term was coined by Thomas Henry Huxley in 1869, and is also used to describe those who are unconvinced of or uncommited to the existence of deities or the truth of religion in general.

The word agnostic comes from the Greek a (without) and gnosis (knowledge). Agnosticism is not to be confused with a view specifically opposing the doctrine of gnosis and Gnosticism—these are religious concepts that are not related to agnosticism.

Antitheism

Main article: Antitheism

Antitheism (Anti-theism) typically refers to a direct opposition to theism. However, antitheism is also sometimes used, particularly in religious contexts, to refer to opposition to god or divine things, rather than to the belief in god. Using the latter definition, it may be possible — or perhaps even necessary — to be an antitheist without being an atheist or nontheist.

Antitheists may believe that theism is harmful to human progression, or may simply be atheists who have little tolerance for views they perceive as irrational. Strong atheists who are not antitheists may believe positively that deities do not exist, but not believe that theism is directly harmful or necessitates opposition.

Criticisms of atheism

Main article: Critique of Atheism

Atheists and atheism have received much criticism, opposition, and persecution, chiefly from theistic sources, throughout human history.

Some criticisms include:

• The lack of belief in a deity who administers justice may lead to poor morals or ethics. This has been countered by atheists who have pointed to the lack of morality in many acts inspired by religion. Also, moral principles may be based on secular ethics such as utilitarianism, deontological ethics, and virtue ethics. Similarly, some studies have shown a positive correlation between the degree of public religiosity in a society and certain measures of dysfunction, such as rates of violence and teenage pregnancies, in that society. And according to The God Who Wasn't There, it also seems the higher a nation's public religiosity, the lower its charity giving and foreign aid.
• That atheism makes life meaningless and miserable. Blaise Pascal made this argument in 1670 in his book Pensées. He claimed that without God, people would only be able to create obstacles and overcome them in an attempt to escape boredom. These token victories would ultimately become meaningless, since people would eventually die, and this was good enough reason not to choose to become an atheist. The existence of atheists who are apparently happy and enjoy life seems to indicate that either the metaphysical conclusions are not an inevitable consequence of atheism, or that they are not necessarily depressing. A common response to this criticism is that it confuses a question of truth (whether gods exist) with a question of comfort.

Atheism and religion

Main article: Atheism and religion

The historical context of how each theistic sect has defined and dealt with atheism is significant. Although atheism is often accompanied by a total lack of spiritual beliefs, this is not an aspect, or even a necessary consequence, of atheism. Indeed, some atheists do believe in a spiritual realm (see afterlife) and may or may not belong to any religious group. Atheists can also be found in several sects of Buddhism and Taoism that do not have theism as a doctrine, and even in religions in which theism has been taught as doctrine.

See also

List of atheists Strong atheism Weak atheism

Related concepts

Agnosticism Criticism of religion Existence of God Pascal's Wager Faith and rationality Religiosity and intelligence Freedom of religion and belief Freethought Humanism Infinitism

Irreligion Nihilism Objectivism Pantheism Rationalist movement Scientific skepticism Secular humanism Secularism Secular ethics

Organizations

American Atheists Atheist Foundation of Australia Camp Quest Camp Quest Ontario Council for Secular Humanism Federation of Indian Rationalist Associations Freedom From Religion Foundation

National Secular Society Ontario Freethinkers Rationalist International Internet Infidels Secular Coalition for America Secular Student Alliance Society of the Godless

Satire

Religious satire Apatheism Evil Atheist Conspiracy Babel Fish

Flying Spaghetti Monster Invisible Pink Unicorn Russell's teapot

External links

Web sites

• Associations
  • Atheist Alliance
  • American Atheists
  • Positive Atheism
  • Freedom From Religion Foundation
  • Atheist Foundation of Australia
  • National Secular Society (UK)
  • TheInfidels.org Site and Forum
  • The Brights
  • The Scottish Atheist Council (UK)
  • Idaho Atheists
  • Secular Coalition for America
  • Secular Student Alliance

Web communities Atheist Parents Group Freethinker's book discussion community Church of Reality FrostCloud.com . NoReligion.ca Freethinkers Positive Atheism The Secular Web The Atheist Coalition The Faithless Community Ex-Christians The Ethical Atheist Atheistic Forum Atheist Blog Aggregator Local Atheist groups Religion is for the Weak Internet radio Atheist Network (Internet Radio) The Infidel Guy Radio Show Freethought Radio

Miscellaneous Atheist Empire: guide to Atheism on the web Atheist Resource Thinking And Moral Problems, Religions And Their Source, Purpose, and Developing A Universal Religion, Parts of Wikibook Template:About.com Ebon Musings: The Atheism Pages Encouraging Ex-Christians Links related to atheism by Atheists of Silicon Valley Political and Atheist Thought Camp Quest: A Secular Summer Camp for Children Darwin Bedford, Atheist Messiah and Spiritual Reality Therapist religioustolerance.org Quentin Smith, atheist philosopher God is imaginary Web site of Jeffrey Grupp, atheist philosopher Atheism page from the BBC website How to be religion free - a code for the Resolute Atheist article on The Psychology of Atheism

Articles

• History of
  • A Historical Outline of Modern Religious Criticism in Western Civilization
• Definitions
  • AllRefer atheism article of polemic usage
  • "Atheism and Agnosticism"
  • "Definition of Atheism"
  • "Types of Atheistic Belief"
  • "What Is Atheism?" from Positive Atheism Magazine
• Defence
  • The End of Faith by Sam Harris
  • Atheism defended
  • Atheism: The Capital Man
  • Introduction to A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right
  • Lecture on Atheism
  • The Philosophy of Atheism by Emma Goldman
  • Why Atheism?
  • Understanding Delusion
  • An Atheist Manifesto by Sam Harris
• Criticism
  • Catholic Encyclopedia: "atheism"
  • The Twilight of Atheism by Alister McGrath
  • Theism, Atheism, and Rationality by Alvin Plantinga
  • Intellectual Sophistication and Basic Belief in God by Alvin Plantinga
• Statistics
  • Atheism: Contemporary Rates and Patterns by Phil Zuckerman
  • BBC Religion
  • Atheism growing
  • A collection of Atheist and non-believer stats

Notes

References

• Altizer, Thomas J.J. (1967). The Gospel of Christian Atheism. London: Collins. Electronic Text
• Armstrong, Karen (1999). A History of God. London: Vintage. ISBN 0-09-927367-5
• Ayer, A. J. (1966). What I Believe. in Humanist, Vol 81 (8) August 1966, p.226-228.
• Baggini, Julian (2003). Atheism: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-280424-3.
• Berman, David (1990). A History of Atheism in Britain: from Hobbes to Russell. London: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-04727-7.
• Berman, David (1983). David Hume and the Suppression of Atheism. in Journal of the History of Philosophy, Vol. 21 (3), July 1983, p.375-387.
• Berman, David (1982). The Repressive Denials of Atheism in Britain in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries in Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, Vol. 82c, (9), p.211-246.
• Borne, Étienne (1961). Atheism. New York: Hawthorn Books. [Originally published in France under the title Dieu n’est pas mort: essai sur l’atheisme contemporain. Librairie Arthème Fayard, 1959]
• Bradlaugh Bonner, Hypatia (1908). Charles Bradlaugh: a record of his life and work. London: T. Fisher Unwin.
• Buckley, M. J. (1987). At the origins of modern atheism. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
• Cudworth, Ralph (1678). The True Intellectual System of the Universe: the first part, wherein all the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted and its impossibility demonstrated.
• d'Holbach, P. H. T. (1772). Good Sense. Electronic Text
• d'Holbach, P. H. T. (1770). The system of nature. Electronic versions:
  • complete text (pdf)
  • complete text (html)
• de Mornay, Phillipe (1587). A woorke concerning the Trewnesse of the Christian Religion, written in French; Against Atheists, Epicures, Paynims, Iewes, Mahumetists. London.
• Everitt, Nicholas (2004). The Non-existence of God: An Introduction. London: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-30107-6.
• Evolution and Religion Can Coexist, Scientists Say
• Flew, Antony (1966). God and Philosophy. London: Hutchinson & Co.
• Flew, Antony (1984a). God, Freedom, and Immortality: A Critical Analysis. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus. ISBN 0-87975-127-4.
• Flew, Antony (1984b). The Presumption of Atheism. New York: Prometheus.
  • complete text (html)
• Flew, Antony (1972). The Presumption of Atheism. in Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 2, p.29-46 [reprinted in Flew 1984a and 1984b above]
• Flint, Robert (1877). Anti-Theistic Theories: Being the Baird Lecture for 1877. London: William Blackwood and Sons. 5th ed, 1894.
• Gaskin, J.C.A. (ed) (1989). Varieties of Unbelief: from Epicurus to Sartre. New York: Macmillan. ISBN 0-02-340681-X.
• Harbour, Daniel (2001). An Intelligent Person's Guide to Atheism. London: Duckworth. ISBN 0-7156-3229-9.
• Hitchens, Christopher (2001). Letters to a Young Contrarian. New York: Basic Books.
• Krueger, D. E. (1998). What is atheism?: A short introduction. New York: Prometheus. ISBN 1-57392-214-5.
• Le Poidevin, R. (1996). Arguing for atheism: An introduction to the philosophy of religion. London: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-09338-4.
• Levin, S. (1995). Jewish Atheism. in New Humanist, Vol 110 (2) May 1995, p.13-15.
• Lyas, Colin (1970). On the Coherence of Christian Atheism. in Philosophy: the Journal of the Royal Institute of Philosophy. Vol. 45 (171), January 1970. pp.1-19.
• Mackie, J. L. (1982). The Miracle of Theism: Arguments for and against the existence of God. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-824682-X.
• Maritain, Jacques (1953). The Range of Reason. London: Geoffrey Bles. Electronic Text
  • Note: Chapter 8, The Meaning of Contemporary Atheism (p.103-117, Electronic Text) is reprinted from Review of Politics, Vol. 11 (3) July 1949, p. 267-280 Electronic Text. A version also appears The Listener, Vol. 43 No.1102, 9 March 1950. pp.427-429,432.
• Martin, Michael (1990). Atheism: A philosophical justification. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. ISBN 0-87722-943-0.
• Martin, Michael, & Monnier, R. (Eds.) (2003). The impossibility of God. New York: Prometheus.
• McGrath, A. (2005). The Twilight of Atheism : The Rise and Fall of Disbelief in the Modern World. ISBN 0-385-50062-9
• McTaggart, John & McTaggart, Ellis (1927). The Nature of Existence. Volume 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• McTaggart, John & McTaggart, Ellis (1930). Some Dogmas of Religion. London: Edward Arnold & Co., new edition. [First published 1906]
• Mills, D. (2004). Atheist Universe, Xlibris, ISBN 1-4134-3481-9.
• Müller, F. Max (1889). Natural Religion: The Gifford Lectures, 1888. London: Longmans, Green and Co.
• Nielsen, Kai (1985). Philosophy and Atheism. New York: Prometheus. ISBN 0-87975-289-0.
• Nielsen, Kai (2001). Naturalism and religion. New York: Prometheus.
• Reid, J.P. (1967). Atheism. in New Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: McGraw-Hill. p.1000-1003.
• Rizzuto, Ana-Maria (1998). Why did Freud reject God?: A psychoanalytic interpretation. Yale University Press. ISBN 0-300-07525-1.
• Robinson, Richard (1964). An Atheist's Values. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• Sharpe, R.A. (1997). The Moral Case Against Religious Belief. London: SCM Press. ISBN 0-334-02680-6.
• Smith, George H. (1990). Atheism, Ayn Rand, and Other Heresies. New York: Prometheus.
  • Excerpt: Defining atheism (html)
  • Excerpt: The Scope of Atheism (html)
• Sobel, Jordan H. (2004). Logic and theism: Arguments for and against beliefs in God. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Soltis, P.S. et al. (1995) Genetic variation in Tragopogan Species: Additional Origins of Allotetraploids T. mirius and T. miscellus (Compositae). American Journal of Botany.
• Stenger, Victor J. (2003). Has science found God?. New York: Prometheus.
• Stein, G. (Ed.) (1984). The Encyclopaedia of Unbelief (Vols. 1-2). New York: Prometheus. ISBN 0-87975-307-2.
• Thrower, James (1971). A Short History of Western Atheism. London: Pemberton. ISBN 0-301-71101-1.
• Vitz, Paul (1999). Faith of the fatherless: the psychology of atheism. Dallas, Texas: Spence. ISBN 1-890626-12-0.
• [1]