The nuts and bolts of atheism: a sagacious scrutiny cum critique into its notoriety, oddity and nihility.

A cursory x-ray from a historical perspective on the vast array of philosophical systems, portray that every epoch in philosophy talk about God.

But in each of these epochs there were various tendencies towards God: some positive (Theism, pantheism etc) and some are negative (Atheism, agnosticism). Among these tendencies is atheism that is our major bus stop for this journey.

Although there was no pronounced atheists in the Cosmocentric epoch of philosophy but the philosophical currents like Democritean, and Epicurean materialism were tiny puffs of hot air in atheistic tea cup. The transition of history through its theocentric epoch marked what Panteleon Iroegbu in his “Kpim of philosophy: metaphysics” calls “A-thes-svegesseheit” meaning the oblivion or total forgetfulness of atheism. But with the birth of “John the Baptist” (i.e. Renaissance) who came to prepare the way for anthropocentricism; there came what THOMAS KUHN will call a “paradigm shift” (change in thought pattern) when people like Galileo Galelei, Francis Bacon, Copernicus with their positive science in the 17th century paved way for the “thanatology” of theocentricism and “nativity” of A-God or the murder of the notion of God.

Atheism was a large current in the modern epoch and as such has got some implications affecting the human person. It is against this background that it becomes a must know for all intellectual minded persons and a “never miss” for all who wish to be enwisdomized. For the accomplishment of this work we shall see why someone who knows for certain that there is a being called God should be postulating arguments to prove the non-existence of this being? Isn’t this involvement, what one may call an intellectual abracadabra? Since one cannot argue the existence of a non-existent nor can one imagine a void.

Egbufoama Chike

Related Post