Book Review: Atheists, by Bruce E. Hunsberger and Bob Altemeyer

I just finished Atheists: A Groundbreaking Study of America's Nonbelievers, by Bruce Hunsberger and Bob Altemeyer, both Canadian professors of psychology. (Hunsberger is now deceased.) According to the authors, who searched the existing literature, this book reports the findings of one of the first social scientific studies of atheists in history.

**

The work focuses not so much on what atheism is or why one should (or shouldn't) be one, which is the concern of practically all other literature on the subject, but on how atheists, as a demographic, think and feel compared to agnostics, religious fundamentalists, inactive believers, and the general public. In many ways, Altemeyer and Hunsberger found, atheists (and agnostics too) really are "different", and almost at a cognitive level—my choice of words, not theirs.

I find that most of the book's results reinforce the feeling I've had for a long time that atheism is more a consequence, rather than a cause, of how one's mind apprehends the world. Particularly noteworthy are the authors' accounts of former devout believers who became atheists. It turns out there is a way to raise your children in a heavily God-and-Jesus-saturated household that will increase their risk of apostasy—and that way isn't what a deeply cynical person might suspect. In other words, parents don’t drive their offspring from the faith through abuse or harassment; sadly, such treatment likely keeps them within the flock.

The authors candidly admit that they were surprised by their own results multiple times. A lifelong atheist, I was at times as well. Are atheists more or less dogmatic than believers? More or less zealous? More or less ethnocentric? I reckon most folks, atheists and believers alike, feel confident they could make qualitative guesses about all of these. Hunsberger and Altemeyer show us data. Someone's bound to be disappointed, and others pleasantly surprised—and it's not always the same team that is vindicated in its prejudices.

Atheists is pretty short—only about 150 pages, is engagingly, informally written and makes for a brisk read. For statistics and social science buffs, copious chapter endnotes open the authors’ kimono regarding statistical significance, correlation, and alpha factors, so anyone who wants to attack their methodology had better have their skills sharp. Moreover, the authors spend the first third of Chapter 8 critiquing their own approach and pointing the way for future studies. One of my own concerns, about the hypotheticals they constructed to measure dogmatism in atheists and believers, was amply and eloquently addressed in the final chapter, in which atheist and humanist activists are given space to speak for themselves. Above all, I hear an imperfectly stifled cry for more, and better-funded, research on this subject. They're professors—can we expect any less?

Hunsberger and Altemeyer disclose their religious orientation (or lack thereof), but first and foremost, I got an impression of earnest, honest scientists tackling what they feel to be an under-studied subject. And yet with all that, they find time to squeeze in a humorous aside or two. If you want a stuffy, pretentious, or doctrinaire treatment of atheists, you'll have to look elsewhere.

I recommend it (Prometheus Books, 2006).

Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article are permitted worldwide without royalty in any medium provided this notice is preserved.