If we base our belief systems on the humble assumption that the complexities of the world are ontologically beyond our understanding, then maybe our belief systems will make more sense and end up causing less suffering. -MOBY

Do questions seek answers or do answers spawn questions? Whichever way it is people have always strived to explain the world around them. Never in history have they come to a consensus and the reason for this is simple. There is NO universal key insight into existence which could elucidate reality.

There are no universal, self-sufficient truths and values, except maybe for the Decalogueian few accepted by most cultures. Even these however are put into question, as proven by growing acceptance of abortion and euthanasia, despite the most basic rule ‘do not kill’.

The truth is, there is no absolute system which can lead people through life. Various have been created, embodied in the numerous mythologies and theologies, but the only success they had was the slaughter of nonbelievers and destruction of their monuments.

The only way to unite people is to make them understand, that some questions may not be answered, in a way which is universally valid. People may of course hold their own beliefs but they should not impose them on others. I myself am especially fond of the scientific method, because it doesn’t accept anything a priori. It humbly creates testable hypotheses and examines them. They are rejected if they fail and if they don’t, they become accepted to be true. All scientific truth is transitory, lasting only until a better (simpler or more exact) hypothesis is made or contradictory evidence arises.

Science, by definition however, may not address some questions. Questions such as: what happens after death?, what lies outside of the universe?, what happened before time started? lie beyond the scope of cognition. These problems are untestable, therefore the only answer to them is: There is no answer. Some people reject this and to them I say: Afterlife is orange… It’s as good an answer as any.

There is no way of rejecting the scientific method and the conclusions it provides without overstepping Arystotelian logic. This does not mean that what science states has any claim to the Truth. After all we may all be disembodied brains in dusty jars hidden away in an old God’s attic.