Humans do not need to comfort themselves with fairy tales

Bowden then comes full-circle back to the comfort/meaning/reason-for-living argument by claiming that we need a reason for being, that reason must be something “beyond the normalities of our daily lives”, and that religion provides it. First of all, I don’t know that making the claim that “needing a reason” for being as a fundamental attribute of human beings is entirely accurate, but it is plausible that most people desire that kind of affirmation.

This argument falls on its face is the next two steps, though. Why must this meaning be something greater than the daily activities in which we engage? Is life not made up of a series of days filled with these “normalities”? Normalities such as pursuing a career or education, caring for children, or just making it through this existence? What if there is no “greater purpose”? Will civilisation suddenly vanish or will people adapt to being the agents in their lives instead of the pawns in a cosmic chess match? Furthermore, I will submit that religion only provides a façade of fulfilling either of the preceding “needs”.

Whether religion is an evolutionary adaptation making sense of a discordant existence or a spandrel of such processes, coming to terms with reality would only be the next step in our development. Holding on to the crutches that we once needed after the cast has been taken off is counter-productive, and as long as we do so, we will never run.

Life can be frightening, bewildering, wonderful, and tedious. It can be mysterious, magical, and ordinary. It can be all of those things at once. Making up answers where there are none is not the solution, and in fact, prevents one from seeking answers themselves. Atheism is not the destruction of the quest for meaning - it is the necessary starting point for the journey.