I went to a Church of England primary school. My teacher was awesome, but somewhat a religious fanatic. I had always believed in God as I was basically told to from a young age. My teacher one day told us the story of Paul, and i was skeptical about the truth of it (aged about 10-11). Later, my teacher told us of how he had been converted in a similar way and I think that killed it for me. Having someone in front of you telling you that they had been given a message from God is very different to reading about it happening to someone thousands of years ago (at least it felt different at the time).
By the time I was 14 I remember talking about it with some of my friends and my words were "I believe there is something, but no-one will ever know what it is." Clear agnostic then, really. As I have gotten older I have added much more nuance to my views, but basically they are the same.
These views have been influenced by many, many people, but chiefly Alan Watts, Joseph Campbell, Eckhart Tolle, Harris, Dawkins etc.
They have all provided influences to what I believe is a definite and fairly closed world view, which i will now provide for you in rant format, because I am high and unable to properly structure an essay.
I believe religious texts can teach us alot about what was important to people of a bygone age. They can tell us about their grasp on physics, mathematics, astrology and astronomy, values, morals and ethics. I believe they can provide a glimpse of something transcendent. But we need to see them for what they are: Myths. Beautiful myths and metaphors that explain to us the nature of life of this planet.
When it comes to questions such as "does God exist", metaphysical questions that science cannot answer, we can all with good conscience provide our own answers based on experience, but to dictate to someone else what their answer should be is morally disgusting. I don't expect someone who hasn't had my experiences to believe what i do.
Answers to moral questions need structure, however, so we can live properly and practically on this planet without being torn apart by having our most deeply held morals questioned, by others and ourselves. Moral certainty would be of great value to our civilization and to our society, equally metaphysical uncertainty.
Sam Harris is very correct in his assertion that moral questions can be answered by science IMO. The greatest good for the greatest number of people is hard to argue with morally. A reduction in suffering cannot be bad. If only this could be conveyed in some form that makes sense to us as humans in our every day lives. Its a difficult question, but one that the human race needs answers to. I believe myths to be the source of consistent morality, and the destruction of mythical thinking is responsible for many of the problems we find ourselves with right now. If everyone in the world was taught to respect nature we wouldn't be losing species and rainforests at an unprecedented rate.
Its sad that there are no myths today. They have been replaced by raw data, and to me something has been lost in the process. Its by no means a disaster. I can have a transcendental experience whenever i want by taking drugs or meditating.
It annoys me when Sam Harris and Dawkins et al describe religion as 'just myth'. For thousands of years, myth provided EVERYTHING to a society. Myths are a means of passing down absolutely huge amounts of information from generation to generation using easy to remember stories. Myths provide us with moral nourishment. Myths offer us a glimpse at something that is beyond our capability to understand. Myths are the key to our psychology. 'Just myth' is to trivialise something that has brought our species from animal to human.
This view of myth is also perpetuated by religious scholars insisting on the truth of claims we now know to be false. Religious texts should not be set in stone, but should apply to our society. They should change with the times and take into account the knowledge that we accumulate. Not to do this shows very little moral development since the Galileo incident.
I take no moral value from the Bible because I wasn't alive at the time and have no frame of reference for the values it espouses. There is moral chaos in the world right now IMHO because there is nothing consistent to tell us what is right or wrong. A myth is needed, not to tell us what to believe but to tell us how to live. Many people have forgotten this.
Imagine how strong the world would be if we all learned the value of cooperation from birth instead of learning our parent's views on the nature of reality and metaphysical answers to unsuitable questions.
In short, my world view is based on the value of cooperation, consistent moral thinking and the idea that denying things that are known to be objectively true is always harmful.
It seems contradictory, but I wish science could be condensed into myth form, where the nature of reality is flexible dependent on what we know, but moral values are consistent and strong.