I enjoyed the article but I think it makes a mistake that takes it to the wrong conclusion. The mistake is the idea that people in the past lived in religious f

I enjoyed the article but I think it makes a mistake that takes it to the wrong conclusion. The mistake is the idea that people in the past lived in religious fevour. If we look at history though, it doesn't seem likely that they did. A minority of people were like that and those around them went along with it so that they could get on with life. In terms of the article, people already lived in "the void". Nowadays, for whatever reason (of which we could probably speculate many causes and paths to where we are now), those with religious fevour have lost power in the West, even if they hold high office. So the majority now does not need to profess a particular faith. If we get something wrong, instead of being punished, we just shrug and say whatever. I think there's modern examples that test this idea. In Afghanistan, under US occupation, the majority was not feverenty Islamic. They just got on with things. When the US withdrew, that religious minority took over and now we see what has happened.