On "Seven Types of Atheism" by John Gray.
This book is very interesting but I think infuriatingly wrong in many places.
I would say that in reality there is only one kind of atheism.
It simply means lack of belief in God or gods.
The implication of this book that atheism is a kind of religion is simply not true.
The implication of this book that humans are incorrigibly religious (however you may define religion) is also simply not true I think.
It is certainly an opinion that is worth investigating and considering however.
In the book, John Gray writes that "religion is universal, theism is a local cult."
I disagree that religion is universal, however the term is defined.
This implies that religion is an inevitable part of human nature, which I think simply cannot be true.
If anything I would say that humans are philosophical animals rather than religious animals.
Any implication that humans can only have morality within religions is also patently not true.
The implication that humans have to live within the social institution of some form of religion is also I believe not necessarily true.
.......
It is just not true that atheism in whatever form it takes, is monotheism in disguise, or in sublimation or in another form, or by another name. This is the basic thesis of Gray's book and I don't think there is enough evidence to justify this thesis - if there is any presented at all.
Belief in God or gods feels very different and has very different implications from belief in humanity or simple lack of belief in God or gods. Belief in God is simply not the same thing as belief in humanity or lack of belief in anything, as Gray believes.
Having said all this, I think this book is very interesting and thought-provoking. I think it is also potentially very fruitful for gaining insights regarding the future of religion and the function it fulfills, and for ideas about what people should involve themselves in instead of religion.
I also think that his unusual line of reasoning - which I think is not strictly logical - does possibly lead to insights of relevance and accuracy.
Kenan Malik has written that whilst we have largely rejected religion, we have failed to replace it with "movements and institutions that can nurture a sense of meaning and belongingness and dignity."
This book is part of the debate that can lead to answers to the questions regarding what to do with religion.