JASON V. SINGH
INDEPENDENT RESEARCHER AND WRITER
Jason V. Singh is an independent researcher and writer based in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. He has no institutional affiliation, no academic position, and no grant funding. That biographical detail isn’t incidental. It’s the argument in miniature.
Singh's work begins from a specific observation: that modern secular institutions didn't thoroughly investigate the question of God's existence and find it lacking. Instead, these biased institutional structures with very specific interests, just decided that the question was basically irrelevant. Because this viewpoint has now been thoroughly embedded into our schools, professional cultures, and public discourse, most people think this “conclusion” is actually a thoroughly investigated idea or just "common sense."
His research asks what happens when the question is examined honestly, with the same evidential standard applied to everything else that matters. What does the informational architecture of physical reality actually show? What does the accuracy of ancient texts—their specific, verifiable claims about physical reality made before instruments existed to confirm them—actually demonstrate? What does the hard problem of consciousness reveal about the limits of the materialist framework? What does sixty years of social data show about what happens to a civilization that removes the transcendent dimension from human life and replaces it with substitutes?
Singh's first book, The Family Business, made the case that scientific materialism functions as an institutional protection racket—that the removal of God from public intellectual life was not a discovery but an “installation” serving specific interests that unfortunately, ultimately produced measurable damage.
His forthcoming book, #BringGodBack, builds on that cleared ground. It is a prosecutorial case for the existence of God built from physics, history, philosophy of mind, and the “prior witness” track record of the Abrahamic scriptures. It examines the informational architecture of reality, the fine tuning of the universe's physical constants, the consciousness problem that the materialist framework cannot solve, and the preserved record of prophetic communication that survives honest evidential examination. It has been reviewed by multiple large language models trained on Western academic literature—models whose training data embeds the materialist framework—and found to be logically coherent and evidentially serious even by evaluators with every structural incentive to dismiss it.
Singh works outside every framework that controls what gets funded and what gets declared serious. This is not a weakness to be hidden, but the point. The framework said only credentialed insiders could ask serious questions. Singh's work asks the question anyway. And the question, it turns out, has been waiting a long time for exactly this kind of approach.
Properly Prepared Brussels Sprouts
JASON V. SINGH
Does God Exist? This is a question that most educated people today believe they have an answer to. The truth is, though, that in many cases, they have arrived at a conclusion—that God does not exist—without actually thoroughly examining all of the underlying arguments.
Many people are simply told what they should think—by their parents, peers, or a culture so ubiquitously saturated and indoctrinated with the “accepted” secular conclusion—until at some point, it stopped feeling like a personal assessment and became a foregone societal conclusion. They absorbed all this spoon-fed belief before they even had the opportunity or the tools to question it, much in the same way a child might accept a sibling’s verdict about Brussels sprouts—confidently and completely—without even taking a single bite.
Some people’s involvement with religion and God resulted in a genuinely bad experience. Maybe it was due to a religious institution that was corrupt, hypocritical, or harmful. Possibly because of a community that used God’s name to control rather than set people free. They “tasted” belief in God and ultimately spat it out, thinking that it had no value. That, however, is where an error was made. They based their decision on the actions of the actual institution rather than all the tremendous benefits that the institution ideally was supposed to be transmitting.
These negative conclusions unfortunately get continually affirmed at every level—by schools, professional cultures, and social circles—and masses of people come to decide that “serious people” have moved beyond God. The conclusion at some point stops feeling discovered and mistakenly starts seeming like it should be obvious.
Here’s the thing about Brussels sprouts that illustrates the entire argument. They taste bitter when unseasoned or poorly prepared. Yet, at the same time, they’re among the most nutritionally dense vegetables available, and are measurably good for you in ways that their taste doesn’t make completely clear. Both of these facts are simultaneously true. The taste can be bad while their nutritional value is great. A person who has never tried them—or who ate them once when badly prepared and never gave them a second chance, is missing something genuinely beneficial and enjoyable, on the basis of an incomplete experience.
As adults, some people realize that Brussels sprouts are delicious and actually good for you. They try them again—this time wonderfully prepared, with genuine openness rather than inherited reluctance—and learn that the bitterness they remembered had faded with their honest repeated engagement. What remained was the nourishment that was always there.
The same could be said for God. The institutional taste could have been quite bitter. The corruption and hypocrisy were real and documented. None of that is being denied. What should be differentiated here, though, is the institutional experience from the thing itself—the preparation from the taste of the vegetable, the cup from the water inside of it. All that’s required is that you try them properly, this time with an open mind.