Ask a lifelong (irreligious) atheist

[robvalue]

I'm not sure that's true. I think there's still some dodgy stuff in that religion. I'll have to look that up and get back to you. For sure it's less hateful, anyway.

You wouldn't be a heathen if you happen to be born in Iraq.
What makes you so sure that your stance (agnostic) is the correct one?

How confident are you that science's view on reality is closer to the truth than the "spiritual" unmeasurable side is?

(After watching a ton of quantum mechanics docos, I feel our view of our reality is very limited at the moment)

If I was born in Iraq, I would assume I'd have been indoctrinated. It's impossible for me to say whether I'd have stayed as a true believer of Islam, or whether I'd come to the conclusion it was BS. I may well have had to pretend, even in the second case. But truth doesn't require indoctrination. If someone can't convince me of it now, then I'll assume the evidence is lacking. And I would hope my morality would lead me to abandon the religion eventually, even if I thought it was true. But I'd be such a different person after all this, that I can't say with any confidence.

My stance is ignostic, not just "I don't know" but "I don't know what you're talking about". I can't have a sensible opinion about something that hasn't been properly defined. In such rare cases where it is, the claims are either trivially true (universe is God), trivially false (internally contradictory) or unfalsifiable (at least for now). So I've had no challenge to my position.

All my experience throughout my while life has been evidence that the scientific method is the most accurate for modelling reality. "Spiritual" methods constantly fail to produce anything of any practical value. So going by results, it's a landslide victory for science. If someone could give me any reason why spiritual methods are better, I'd be happy to listen. They'd have to first tell me what the hell they even are. They seem to amount to drawing conclusions based in emotions; conclusions which have no use and can't be verified.

So I don't know what spiritual is. There may well be parts of reality we don't know about, and will maybe never know about. But I feel science has modelled what is available, in the best way. The rest cannot yet be investigated. Once it can be, the method is almost certainly going to be scientific. Other methods have never shown any worth whatsoever.