Atkins, was no fan of objectivity. Kierkegaard unlike Atkins was no fan of abstract thinking. Kierkegaard rejected rational proofs for God’s existence. With regard to his own existence, Kierkegaard didn’t need any proof of that. Kierkegaard was concerned with how subjective experience revealed in emotion and feelings relate to the will. His philosophy was called “existentialism.” He is credited with being the father of that movement.
Permit me to amplify “existentialist” to refer not only to human existence but to all of existence. Now, what can we call Peter Atkins, who insists that the “universe is an engagingly re-organised form of nothing?” An Insistentialist. “I insist, therefore I’m not.”