@Bars: Perhaps I should delve into more epistemological detail.
We begin with our senses and our consciousness. Through our consciousness we can control some of our muscles, define terms, store memories, form hypotheses, and have faith. That's about it.
Sense data is a stream. It isn't all saved; we don't remember everything. The most efficient way to remember is through concept formation - using words with definitions. Remembering every detail of a picture is difficult. Remembering the point of that Puncture, expressed in words, is easy.
In this way, we can have an unwavering faith regarding a priori knowledge. 2+2=4. If we are seeing something (now), we're seeing it. If we remember something, then we remember it (why we saw it, whether it was real, whether the memory is accurate, etc, is a different conclusion).
Hypotheses work differently. A hypothesis can never be proven, only refuted. Performing experiments over and over again (with our muscles, to create relevant sensory data) to test a hypothesis might lend further support, but never solves.
This is where faith comes in. Faith is the thought process which elevates a personal hypothesis to a personal theory. It is the distance between the support for a hypothesis and its actual belief.
All a posteriori knowledge is the result of the scientific method. Even the belief in God; you cannot show me a person who believes in God who never sensed anything which they interpret as evidence to support their belief. Even "reality exists" is a theory, not an axiom; go watch some newborns, experimenting with their limbs, piecing together the astonishing idea that their limbs and the world they sense are connected somehow.
Thus: all a priori knowledge is deductive and certain in nature, and all a posteriori knowledge is inductive (meaning: a matter of evidentiary support and faith) and could be refuted.
But how far can you get, how can you even live without constant support, if you do not act on your inductive conclusions?
This is why I put your claim that God might exist because evidence is "inconclusive" in the same pile of garbage ideas as "our reality might be fake and we're actually in The Matrix." You are holding out on putting your faith into a position heavily supported by evidence, because you are giving entirely too much credit to a conspiracy theory with no legitimate evidentiary support.
Don't get me wrong: it's wise to keep a chain of accountability in your thoughts and to remember which things are deductive and which are inductive. It's wise to use critical thinking to be on the lookout for evidence which refutes theories you've put your faith into. But your actions show what you truly believe.
About epistemology: yes, when we start to question everything, we sooner or later unravel all layers of apparent certainty and arrive at Descartes' single unquestionable premise: I think, therefore I am. That's why everything we think we know about the world is a leap of faith at some level. However, that's why I said there are degrees of uncertainty. If I had to imagine my mind as a room with filing cabinets, religion would be in "don't know - don't care", "seems unlikely but you never know" and "instructions unclear, dick got suck in ceiling fan" - right next to epistemology.
Obviously, not everything falls in these categories. If nothing else, the fan replacement expenses would ruin me.
The Wheel of Nerfs turns, and builds come and pass, leaving memories that become legend. Legend fades to myth, and even myth is long forgotten when the build that gave it birth comes again.
I'm an agnostic atheist, meaning I think the universe is unknowable, including the answer to the question about god, and I also think it's more likely that there's no such thing as God and he's just a fanciful fabrication of the human mind in a futile attempt to explain the unknown.
The part I'm reasonably certain of is that the antropomoprhic representation of God as seen in most religions is utter bullshit. If there is some higher power, it should be as far away from us as we are from bacteria.
I also find it extremely strange and even a little bit insane to blindly believe in the writings of thousand-year-old books in the present day and age when we have so much information about the thousands of religions which have existed and exist today, the way religion appeared and the historical, social and psychological mechanisms which make it tick.
Atheists display some similarities to religious people, meaning they seem strangely certain in the answer to a question which is IMO unanswerable.
To end my exposition, since for me this is a question without an answer, I think it's an unproductive waste of time to argue about it.
edit: funny, I saw this in 9gag just after I posted here:
That was a long post. Where's my potato?
As to the question at hand, I pretty much have the same thinking as Bars. Seeing what religion has done in the last thousands of years, it's hard to be religious.
^humanity doesn't/didn't need religion because people can't tell right from wrong, humanity needs/needed religion because people can tell right from wrong, realize they can get ahead by doing wrong, but will only decide against doing wrong if they expect some sort of cosmic retribution for screwing other people over.
See that is one of my issues with religion. You're not a good person just because you're religious. There are far to many who are assholes with no respect for others, but since they sit on a bench one day week, they feel superior and as if everything they do is great.
If you need a reward to do something good you're not doing it for the right reasons. It's like the people who post on social medias "gave this homeless person a sandwhich, look how humble and amazing I am". You're not doing it to help, you're doing it for the praise you'll get which I find worse than not doing anything at all.
I believe stuff like the Ten Commandments were pretty handy for building decent societies. But I've always seen religions as a nice way for certain people to gain power. "Because god said so / or you'll go straight to hell" is pretty effective when your fellow peeps believe in that.
Letters of indulgence were a masterpiece: Pay now and get the profit in afterlife. That's genius from the churches pov.
I believe stuff like the Ten Commandments were pretty handy for building decent societies. But I've always seen religions as a nice way for certain people to gain power. "Because god said so / or you'll go straight to hell" is pretty effective when your fellow peeps believe in that.
Letters of indulgence were a masterpiece: Pay now and get the profit in afterlife. That's genius from the churches pov.
Organised and state-sanctioned religion is the greatest and most successful scam in history.
@Entropic_Fire: the problem with this type of religion is it aims to make sheep out of people. You're supposed to read the Bible, not to understand it. Independent, rational, skeptical and questioning thought is frowned on; blind faith is encouraged.
This might have some good results if the powers to be brainwash the sheep into following a decent code of ethics. Problem is, practical experience has showed us again and again that sooner or later a ruthless bastard - or group of bastards - gains power and starts to use the flock for much more unpleasant purposes. There's a short distance between a generous, ethical person brainwashed by religion and a mouth-frothing fanatic. 'Hey, these guys are heretics, it's our holy mission from God to do bad things to them' - and suddenly 'don't kill' turns into 'kill the infidels' and we all know how it goes from there.
The Wheel of Nerfs turns, and builds come and pass, leaving memories that become legend. Legend fades to myth, and even myth is long forgotten when the build that gave it birth comes again.
I'm perfectly fine with dictatorship if i'm the dictator though.
First thing i would do is cut the work-week to 3.5 days, doubling labor and infrastructure potential.
Religion seeks truth and truth is like the stars. Radiant and just for an instance, ever-fading after.
What exist's nowadays is no where near religion in my opinion.
Peace,
-Boem-
Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes
