interesting topic
Personally i define religion as a belief in a higher good.
A higher good is an over-human ethic disticintion between right and wrong.
What I mean here is that right or wrong is not based on beliefs and individual viewpoints, but in a truth that is unquestionable.
for example a higher truth in the old part of the bible is the 10 commandments, while jesus said something about to love each other and forgiveness.
So in that regard, believing in a religion would be to believe in some truths regarding ethics and fairness.
I believe that opinions are created in a society as a 'product' of the society. In that way our opinions are shaped by our experience and life so far. In that sense, thruths that seem to be just and fair could be unimaginable in another being's mind. (That's kinda like Marx, if it reminded anybody of something)
As an international semi-capitalistic society, a lot of citizens in this world (especially western) are born and raised with values that makes the foundations of the opinions of these human beings, and in that sense me we will all agree on some of the cornerstones of human societies (don't kill), and we might also agree about some basic capitalistic values (the market and economy), and in the same way agree more or less about some common ethical values, that are agreed upon as unquestionable. (basically those things that we call right and wrong)
So because I believe that our sense of just and fairness is created in the society, I don't believe in religion... To answer the question: I'm an atheist.
To be honest to myself, I need to confess that those viewpoints are trapped in their own logic, since they are just the sum of my experience with life so far.
Are they right or wrong?.. I don't think so.
At least it's only my personal opinion, so I anybody feels like taking offence then please don't bother, because it isn't meant to provoke
stefanhendriks, I've actually thought about pretty much the same thing... As I see it, assuming that human beings have a free will, it actually disproves logic. (which makes everything a bit silly, since the very same argument wouldn't be valid without logic).
So instead I tend to believe it disproves a unified theory about the universe.
It was Aristoteles who talked about the unmoved mover... He saw him as a god sitting somewhere wondering about his creation. For Platon this god was the idea behind logic, and in that sense he was 'logic', nothing more, nothing less. Platon and Aristoteles believe btw in a higher thruth, both believing that by logic we could realize this thruth, and conclude what was right and what was wrong. (which I've had some furious fight with my philosophy teacher about
)