Religion Without God

What is this book about?

The last book by the legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin, published in 2013 after his death. Dworkin argues that religion does not have to mean belief in a supernatural God; at its core it is a reverence for objective value and for the beauty of the universe. A person can disbelieve in God and still hold a "religious attitude" — a conviction that right and wrong, and the meaning of life, are not human inventions but real. The book uses philosophical argument to rebuild, for a secular age, both moral objectivity and awe.

Why read it?

Its value is that it breaks down the either/or wall between theism and atheism: an atheist, it turns out, can still have faith — faith not in a god but in value and in the universe. For anyone pulled between reason and belief, it offers a middle position that does not require self-deception. Dworkin was a major legal philosopher, his arguments are clean, and the book is short — though following the reasoning takes some patience.

Core Ideas

• Religion's core is reverence for objective value and the beauty of the universe, not blind belief in a supernatural God.
• An atheist can hold a religious attitude too, with value rather than God as the object of faith.
• Right and wrong, and the meaning of life, are not inventions but realities independent of us.
• Equating religion with theism is a narrowing that leaves secular people needlessly without awe.

What questions does this book try to answer?

• How can an atheist arrive at an ultimate faith?
• Once belief in God is gone, can morality and meaning still have an objective foundation?

Who should read it?

For lovers of philosophy, for atheists, and for anyone exploring between reason and faith. It assumes no professional training, but it touches on ideas such as the reality of value, so it rewards slow reading. Religious readers may find it clarifying: the religious attitude and theism are not the same thing.

How to Read It

The source note holds that Dworkin lays a foundation for rebuilding moral objectivity and awe in a secular society. Watch his premises: he assumes value is objectively real, and he detaches the "religious attitude" from any particular doctrine. Both can be challenged — the reality of value remains disputed in philosophy, and believers may feel that reducing religion to an "attitude" sidesteps what faith actually involves. The book presents one set of arguments; whether they hold is for the reader to decide.