One good definition of maturity is:  the state of being willing and able to accept things as they really are.  In this sense of the word, religious people could not possibly be called mature.

Thankfully, reality is not a democracy, nor is it established by consensus or majority rule.  Centuries ago, the Earth was generally accepted as being flat, and until Galileo debunked the idea in 1638, Aristotle’s theory that heavy objects fell faster than light ones was generally held to be true.  Evidence is the only meaningful foundation for reality, because real evidence can be perceived and/or witnessed by virtually anyone, regardless of their background, training, or belief systems.  Although the story may be apocryphal, Galileo found sufficient evidence to refute Aristotle by merely dropping stones from the Leaning Tower of Pisa.  Anyone with eyes in attendance that pivotal day – even the lowliest, uneducated peasants – would have instantly understood that the mighty Greek philosopher had only a limited grasp of reality.

Religion is not based in reality.  In the dim past, lacking any sort of real evidence, people clinging to supernatural gods were compelled to invent the concept of faith, which is nothing more than a semantic trick designed to permit the lifelong suspension of reality, and to dispense with reality’s troublesome prerequisite for observable facts.  Faith was not invented maliciously, or necessarily for reasons pertaining to profit; in the absence of any sort of factual evidence, faith was simply the only game in town.  Just like lonely children who play with imaginary friends, religious faith gave people the psychological strength to endure life’s many struggles and hardships.  Faith is a placebo, and a very effective one.

In response to the deepest and most important questions of our existence, atheists are nothing more mysterious or complicated than people with the courage and maturity to say “I do not know, but any explanation will need facts and evidence for me to consider it.”  With the conspicuous exception of religious matters, this statement defines and encompasses the attitudes of most people with respect to virtually all other endeavors or topics of discussion.  For 21st century epistemology, the requirement for facts and evidence is commonplace – and common sense.

Where did we come from?  I don’t know.

Why are we here?  I don’t know.

Why does the Universe exist?  I don’t know.

Many of those who play the game of faith will privately concede the fallacious tautology of inserting “God” as the answer to the final question.  As if in defense of The Alamo itself, cagey proponents of religion will then point to morality and even workplace ethics as sound reasons to continue deluding the masses with false and fanciful fictions.  The only problem with this idea, is that zero percent of any modern labor pool would increase their efforts under management exhortations like “Call in sick and face the wrath of Shiva” or “Disobey the boss and Thor’s hammer will mend your evil ways.”  Most workers respond to reality-based incentives like paychecks and compliments, and delusional rewards in the afterlife are effective only if they are genuinely believed.  One might as well advocate bald-faced lying as proper management technique.

Morality is certainly an important issue, but why use fairy tales as our guidebooks?  Steven Pinker gave the definitive answer when he wrote

“The essence of morality is the interchangeability of perspectives: the fact that as soon as I appeal to you to treat me in a certain way (to help me when I am in need, or not to hurt me for no reason), I have to be willing to apply the same standards to how I treat you, if I want you to take me seriously.”

The Golden Rule, in other words.  Whatsoever you do unto the least of my brothers, that you do unto me.  Jesus sounds like a mature atheist!

	Web useless-knowledge.com