My reading phase has entered some kind of pattern. Over the last one year, I've read at least 3 books on atheism. Well, that's not really true. We can say that these books, while only some of them are blatantly atheistic, primarily suggest, at the very least, a total lack of any conceivable reason or cause behind a continuation of belief in religions.
But my own transition towards a public denial of a supernatural God did not need these books. When I was in my early-twenties, I used to say I was an agnostic, without so much of a clue as to what that was supposed to mean, meaning that I do not care what you believe in as long as what you believe is something you don't want my participation in. So you could be a Hindu, Muslim or Christian, but what I really wanted to know was if you could be relied on for a smoke & a tea.
At the time, 9/11 was still fresh, the London bombings had not happened, & while there was considerable history of religious riots in India, I had no concrete idea of things & why they are the way they are.
Whatever has happened between those early years of this decade till now - & that includes both domestic & international incidents, & my own ways of thinking & understanding the world - has transformed me from the nonchalant apologist I pretended to be - I was always a non-believer, really - to someone who sees religions as totally useless & religiosity as downright vile.
Nevertheless, my wonder at how people can & do walk the middle-path so convincingly remains. I also think that the middle-path is a more complex experience.
Yet, I just don't think that these are questions of complexity anymore than performance-enhancing drugs make a case for general well-being.