Thanks. I do spend a lot of time on this stuff, but it’s somewhere between a hobby and perhaps a quixotic quest. Philosophy in general is arguably academic. At least the philosophy of religion is obviously relevant to the real world since religions have a social impact.

I’ve also thought there’s a clear link between religious and political indoctrination. This was the point of my article, “The Theistic Priming of Oligarchy,” and I’m sure I made the connection a few times in my Trumpism articles.

There is indeed a battle here because progressive modernity is anomalous in human history. Theocracy and master-slave hierarchies are the norms. I’m interested in the Nietzschean problem of searching for a viable form of modernity. Currently, we’re seeing an autocratic backlash against democracy and neoliberalism, for example. Can society survive with no myths or noble lies at all? What would a truly enlightened culture look like, one that’s free from delusion? Is it even imaginable?

This article on the preposterousness of theism was loosely inspired by one of Prudence’s articles on the evidence for theism. Clearly, my article is liable to offend religious people, as well it should. Why should nonbelievers have to suffer the absurdity alone, surrounded by so much flagrant religious lunacy? The technical debates about who has the burden of proof, the atheist or the theist, are somewhat mooted by the fact that theism is a philosophical nonstarter in the context of modernity. When an atheist takes up the burden of proof, it’s at least partly an act of charity.