Now about the pascal's wager argument I read on earlier in the thread (a gambling man's choice) - it is argued that when you die and there is a god after all, you're better off believing. As such, it would make sense to believe, because it gives you better odds. Aside from the fact that there are many religions, which all excluse each other, there is another point I'd like to make.
This gamble somewhat assumes that believing does not come at a cost, it's a sort of insurance for free. That is not true. To become a 'good' believer (and what constitutes as good is already impossible to find out) you need to invest a lot of time and energy. I think about 5-10% of your waking time is not even a bad estimate for how much time ritual activities take. If the religion is not true, and there is nothing after all, that time is wasted. You had only one life, a limited amount of time, and you wasted it for nothing.
I find that price to be steep!
As for 'scientific proof' in archeology; many religions claim to have proof for their history. Not just Christians and Jews. And such proof is often shaky at best. Even if we leave out dead religions (and some of them aren't as dead as you think, old norse and celtic gods still have followers these days) there are still dozens of religions to choose from, and thousands of denominations. Let's be honest here, most people are 'religion x' because they were raised either as a member, or in an environment where many people were a member.
As for the soul: The problem is that many concepts of the soul consider the soul to be something unchangable, but at the same time personality is a basic part of the soul. It is already proven that damage in certain parts of the brain can change someone completely. Nice and easygoing persons can become vile toxic monsters, or the other way around. And not just brain damage changes how we act and what we are: hormones and certain types of drugs can change persons significantly. Personality is something that is embedded in the brain.
This gamble somewhat assumes that believing does not come at a cost, it's a sort of insurance for free. That is not true. To become a 'good' believer (and what constitutes as good is already impossible to find out) you need to invest a lot of time and energy. I think about 5-10% of your waking time is not even a bad estimate for how much time ritual activities take. If the religion is not true, and there is nothing after all, that time is wasted. You had only one life, a limited amount of time, and you wasted it for nothing.
I find that price to be steep!
As for 'scientific proof' in archeology; many religions claim to have proof for their history. Not just Christians and Jews. And such proof is often shaky at best. Even if we leave out dead religions (and some of them aren't as dead as you think, old norse and celtic gods still have followers these days) there are still dozens of religions to choose from, and thousands of denominations. Let's be honest here, most people are 'religion x' because they were raised either as a member, or in an environment where many people were a member.
As for the soul: The problem is that many concepts of the soul consider the soul to be something unchangable, but at the same time personality is a basic part of the soul. It is already proven that damage in certain parts of the brain can change someone completely. Nice and easygoing persons can become vile toxic monsters, or the other way around. And not just brain damage changes how we act and what we are: hormones and certain types of drugs can change persons significantly. Personality is something that is embedded in the brain.
