School #141

Atheism / Secularism

Ancient (Lucretius, Epicurean theology); early modern (Spinoza's philosophical pantheism as functional atheism, the French *philosophes*); twentieth-century academic atheism and the post-2000 "New Atheist" public movement.

Atheism is the position that no gods exist; secularism is the political and cultural position that public institutions should be organised independently of religious authority. The two are related but distinct: a non-atheist can be a political secularist; an atheist may or may not endorse a programmatic secularism in public life. This entry covers the broad anti-theistic and anti-clerical positions that the Works layer references collectively.

Worldview

No gods exist; supernatural agency is illusory; religious institutions, while sometimes producing real goods, do not warrant the epistemic or political authority they have traditionally claimed. Human life is to be made meaningful within a naturalistic framework.

Moral Implications

Moral norms are grounded in human capacities and needs rather than divine command. The atheist-secularist ethical tradition has been variously naturalist, humanist, utilitarian, and existentialist.

Practical Implications

Atheism and secularism have shaped the modern European Enlightenment, French *laïcité*, post-1789 republican political traditions, twentieth-century state-atheist regimes (in their authoritarian forms), and the late-twentieth-century secularisation of much Western European intellectual culture.

I. Time

Time, for atheism and secularism, is the cosmological time of the natural sciences — the deep history of the universe from the Big Bang through cosmic, geological, and biological evolution to the present, with the future projected by the same naturalistic methods. There is no eschatological closure imposed by divine judgement and no providential narrative ordering events toward a transcendent end. Human lives are finite spans within this much larger temporal field, and secular meaning is made within that span rather than secured by any promise of personal post-mortem continuation.

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Substantival Grain: Continuous Freedom: Non-Deterministic Traversability: Linear Dimensionality: One Direction: Uni-directional

II. Space

Space, for the atheist-secularist, is the physical universe as the sciences describe it — vast, ancient, governed by impersonal laws, indifferent to human purpose. There is no sacred geography in the supernatural sense, though secularism may well treat particular places as historically and culturally significant. Carl Sagan's 'pale blue dot' image captures the characteristic secular response: humility about humanity's cosmic position combined with renewed attention to the fragile planetary home we actually inhabit. Space is the indifferent stage on which human meaning has to be made.

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Substantival Curvature: Flat Dimensionality: Three Locality: Local

III. Matter

Matter, for atheism and secularism, is substantival and is what there ultimately is — no separate spiritual substance, no divine fiat sustaining contingent being, no creation ex nihilo standing behind the material order. The natural sciences describe what is real, and whatever else we want to talk about (mind, value, meaning) must in the end be a feature of material organisation rather than of any second realm. The materialist commitment is internal to the secular outlook even where individual atheists hesitate to call themselves reductive physicalists.

Attributes
Extent: Finite Ontological Status: Substantival Conservation: Conserved Dimensionality: Three Locality: Local

IV. Observer

Persons are embodied, finite, mortal organisms in a universe without supernatural agency. Meaning is made within human life rather than received from a transcendent source.

Attributes
Time Instance: Single Space Instance: Single Extent of Knowledge: Mediated Retainment of Knowledge: Partial Physicality: Embodied Agency: Active Number: Plural Metaphysical Agency: None Moral Authority: Reason Theological Method: N/A

V. Energy

Energy is treated by the secularist as a real physical quantity governed by the natural laws the sciences have established, conserved within closed systems and convertible between forms. There is no divine animating energy beyond these physical relations, and the apparent vitality of living things reduces to (or supervenes on) the energetic processes that biochemistry and physiology describe. The secular outlook treats energy as one of the basic features of an entirely natural cosmos, with no further metaphysical category required to ground it.

Attributes
Extent: Finite Ontological Status: Substantival Conservation: Conserved Dispersibility: Irreversible

VI. Information

Information, for the secular naturalist, is a real but emergent feature of physical configurations — neural patterns, genetic codes, social and cultural transmission — rather than a separate metaphysical substance or a divine logos. The growth of human knowledge is treated as a natural-historical achievement, made possible by evolved cognitive capacities and cultivated through the institutions of science, scholarship, and public reason. Religious revelation is demoted from a privileged information channel to one historical phenomenon among others. Truth is hard-won by the methods that have proved themselves rather than received from above.

Attributes
Ontological Status: Emergent Cosmic Conservation: Conserved Personal Conservation: Non-conserved Granularity: Continuous
← #140 Scientism All Schools #142 Lebensphilosophie (Philosophy of Life) →

Works that name Atheism / Secularism in their embodiments

Foundational texts that draw on this school, with each work's declared weight.

22%
Some Dogmas of Religion (Middle)
J. M. E. McTaggart · 1906
18%
On the Prescription of Heretics (Pre-Montanist)
Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus · c. 203
16%
Contact (Late)
Carl Sagan · 1985
15%
The Future of an Illusion (Late)
Sigmund Freud · 1927 (German; English 1928)
15%
Human, All Too Human (Mid)
Friedrich Nietzsche · 1878 (1st part); 1879 (Assorted Opinions and Maxims); 1880 (The Wanderer and His Shadow)
14%
Letter to Pythocles (Mature)
Epicurus · c. 306-270 BC
14%
The Moment (Final (year of death))
Søren Kierkegaard · 1854-55 (nine pamphlets)
10%
Daybreak (Mid)
Friedrich Nietzsche · 1881

How Atheism / Secularism resolves each dilemma

56 resolved positions across 4 dimensions, including 6 distinctive where the majority of schools go the other way · 1 unaligned.

Each dimension is sorted so minority positions come first. Mainstream positions are folded into an expandable list.

Time · 9 dilemmas, all mainstream

Matter · 7 dilemmas · 4 distinctive

What stuff is — fundamental, relational, or appearance.

Distinctive · only 16% of schools agree (32/202)
What is money?
The question of what money is — a measured store of real value, an agreed-on practice, a relational ledger of debts, or just a name we apply to many different things — sits behind every argument about inflation, cryptocurrency, debt, and the state.
Money is a social practice — its content is what we make it.
On this view, money is exactly what societies do that performs the monetary functions. There is no fact about whether something is 'really' money beyond whether it is used as money. A community that decides shell beads or carbon credits or proof-of-work hashes count as …
Roads not taken Money is a real institution with intrinsic features. (54%) · Money is the ledger of obligations among real people. (15%) · “Money” names a family of practices — the definition question is nominal. (8%)
Distinctive · only 16% of schools agree (32/202)
What is a nation?
Whether a nation is a real moral community with intrinsic character, a constructed legal-political artifact, a web of kinship and shared history, an imagined community, or a conventional partition of a deeper unity — these are real ontological positions with sharply different political downstream.
A nation is a constructed polity — a project, not a discovery.
On this view, nations are made: by treaties, by wars, by deliberate institution-building, by the slow work of collective practice. There is nothing intrinsic about a national kind; what exists is the practice. What we owe the nation is what we owe any institution we …
Roads not taken A nation is a real moral community with intrinsic character. (54%) · A nation is the web of kinship, ancestry, and shared land that hosts a people. (15%) · “Nation” names a family of practices imaginatively held together. (8%)
Distinctive · only 16% of schools agree (32/202)
What makes someone male or female?
Whether sex is a real biological kind, a constructed social category, a relational identity, a label applied to varied phenomena, or a conventional distinction within a deeper unity is the ontological question the contemporary dispute about gender is mostly about.
Gender is constructed; what counts as male or female reflects practice.
On this view, while biological features exist, what they socially mean — what counts as a man or a woman, what roles attach, how the categories are policed and revised — is the work of social practice. The categories are real but constructed; revising them …
Roads not taken Sex is a real biological kind with given content. (54%) · Sex and gender are constituted by relations of recognition. (15%) · “Male” and “female” are family-resemblance terms — no single essence. (8%)
Distinctive · only 16% of schools agree (32/202)
Should we edit the human germline?
Whether human nature is a given biological kind, a constructed category, a relational achievement, a family-resemblance cluster, or a conventional distinction within deeper unity is the ontological question the policy debate over heritable gene editing is mostly about.
The categories we count as 'human' are emergent from practice; germline editing is a practice-revision like any other.
On this view, biological facts about the genome exist, but what we count as 'human nature' is downstream of practice. The germline is one more thing humans now have technical access to; the question is not whether the practice transgresses an essence but whether the …
Roads not taken Human nature is a real biological kind given by reproductive biology or by creation; editing the germline transgresses what is given. (54%) · Personhood is constituted by relations of descent and kinship; germline editing reshapes the relational fabric. (15%) · 'Human nature' is a cluster term without a single essence; the editing question is empirical, not metaphysical. (8%)
3 mainstream positions

Observer · 37 dilemmas · 2 distinctive

Mind, agency, and the knower's relation to the known.

Distinctive · only 16% of schools agree (32/202)
When does a person begin?
The political question of abortion sits atop an older ontological one: at what point does there exist a someone — a being with moral standing — rather than merely the materials from which one will form?
A person comes into being gradually, as the capacities of a mind develop.
On this view, personhood is not a status conferred at a moment but a property of beings with certain capacities — to feel, to suffer, to prefer, eventually to reflect. A zygote has none of these; a late-term fetus has many; a newborn has most. …
Roads not taken A person exists from conception — when a new being comes into existence. (54%) · Personhood is conferred by being-in-relation. (15%) · The question presupposes a fact of the matter that isn’t there. (8%)
Distinctive · only 16% of schools agree (32/202)
What is marriage?
Behind every disagreement about how marriage should be defined is a prior disagreement about what kind of thing it is — a given order to be recognized, a practice to be negotiated, or a web of relations to be woven.
Marriage is a practice we shape — its content is what we make it.
On this view, marriage is a human institution shaped by law, custom, and the agreements of those who enter it. There is no fixed essence to discover, only practices to negotiate. As societies change — granting women legal personhood, recognizing no-fault divorce, extending the institution …
Roads not taken Marriage has a given form — it’s a kind of thing we recognize, not make. (54%) · Marriage is constituted by the web of relations it creates. (15%) · “Marriage” names a family of practices — the definition question is nominal. (8%)
34 mainstream positions
Could causation work backwards? Causation runs one way — the arrow of time is real and structural. 68% Is the asymmetry between memory and anticipation a real feature of time, or just of us? The asymmetry is real because time itself has a real direction. 68% Is the arrow of time a real feature of the cosmos, or only of how we describe it? The arrow is real and structural; the asymmetry isn't an artifact of description. 68% Is environmental damage ever truly permanent? Damage is real and permanent on the relevant timescales. There is no recovery; there is only limitation. 66% Can a civilization recover from collapse? Civilizational complexity is hard to build and easy to lose; recovery is at best partial. 66% Does the second law of thermodynamics mean something morally? Entropy is what time is. The moral weight, if any, is the weight of working against the current. 66% Is truth universal, tradition-bound, situated, or constructed? Truth is mind-independent, universal, accessible in principle to all. 65% Does environmental harm in another country bind me morally? Moral obligation tracks the relations one is in; distance does matter, structurally. 50% Can prayer for someone far away affect them? Prayer changes the pray-er, not the prayed-for. 49% Are coincidences ever more than coincidence? Coincidence is exactly what the math says it is. The pattern is in the noticer. 49% What is our place in nature? Active in a real nature — we cultivate, steward, transform. 48% Should we colonize space? Cultivating worlds beyond Earth is the next form of stewardship. 48% Is genetic engineering of food stewardship or domination? Genetic modification is cultivation by other means. 48% Is divine omniscience compatible with human freedom? The observer is in time; foreknowledge across times raises real freedom problems. 46% Does meditation reveal something genuinely timeless? Meditators are bounded observers reporting unusual brain states; the 'timeless' is metaphorical. 46% Does prayer change God's mind? If there is an addressee at all, it is in time; prayer is communication, and may genuinely change what comes next. 46% Are the dead morally present to the living? Observers are bounded by their own moment, and no further agency makes the dead present. 44% What kind of religious-theological authority does the tradition recognize? The category does not apply — the school is non-religious. 44% Who is the moral primary — the individual, the community, the cosmos, the class, or the species? The discrete person is the moral primary. 40% Is reality fundamentally digital? No — continuous fields, classical limits, analog deep structure. 37% Are there indivisible units of experience? No — continuous Jamesian stream, phenomenological lived time. 37% Is memory stored or reconstructed? Reconstructed — continuous re-narrating, no fixed engrams. 37% Does history have a direction or meaning? History is not where the deepest truth lives. 37% What makes someone the same person over time? You are your body — continuity is bodily continuity. 36% Is the late-stage dementia patient still the person their spouse married? Same body, same person — even when the cognitive pattern has changed. 36% If a teleporter copied and destroyed you, would you have survived? Different body, different person — you died in the scanner. 36% Do animals have moral standing comparable to humans? Animal minds are real because biology is the substrate of mind. 32% Could a fetal brain organoid in a petri dish be conscious? Brain tissue can in principle do what brains do; the question is integration. 32% Should we trust expert testimony when we can't verify it? Trust expertise whose conclusions a competent mind can in principle reproduce. 32% Is religious revelation a real source of knowledge? Revelation is evaluable by reason — and not above it. 32% Does an LLM 'know' the things it correctly produces? An LLM can produce correct outputs but not reason to them; useful, not knowing. 32% What happens to "you" when you die? Death is genuinely the end. 30% Could an AI have a mind that matters? No — mind is what a biological brain does, and an LLM has no brain. 30% How is knowledge of reality produced? Through controlled empirical investigation. 17%
1 unaligned
Information · 4 dilemmas, all mainstream
Jump to school (202)
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 #17 #18 #19 #20 #21 #22 #23 #24 #25 #26 #27 #28 #29 #30 #31 #32 #33 #34 #35 #36 #37 #38 #39 #40 #41 #42 #43 #44 #45 #46 #47 #48 #49 #50 #51 #52 #53 #54 #55 #56 #57 #58 #59 #60 #61 #62 #63 #64 #65 #66 #67 #68 #69 #70 #71 #72 #73 #74 #75 #76 #77 #78 #79 #80 #81 #82 #83 #84 #85 #86 #87 #88 #89 #90 #91 #92 #93 #94 #95 #96 #97 #98 #99 #100 #101 #102 #103 #104 #105 #106 #107 #108 #109 #110 #111 #112 #113 #114 #115 #116 #117 #118 #119 #120 #121 #122 #123 #124 #125 #126 #127 #128 #129 #130 #131 #132 #133 #134 #135 #136 #137 #138 #139 #140 #141 #142 #143 #144 #145 #146 #147 #148 #149 #150 #151 #152 #153 #154 #155 #156 #157 #158 #159 #160 #161 #162 #163 #164 #165 #166 #167 #168 #169 #170 #171 #172 #173 #174 #175 #176 #177 #178 #179 #180 #181 #182 #183 #184 #185 #186 #187 #188 #189 #190 #191 #192 #193 #194 #195 #196 #197 #198 #199 #200 #201 #202