Hi jambon1 here are some thoughts your post caused in me.
Belief is very mysterious thing in many ways. Everyone has a belief in something and it is that foundation belief that informs the rest of a person’s beliefs. Life, and the information it contains will get sorted as a function of that belief. Even atheists have a core internal belief. In some cases it will be the view that God doesn’t exist, or that science is the only way to knowledge and that there is only this one form of materialistic knowledge. Others though have the abiding belief that an intelligence of some sort must be somehow the foundation of all that makes sense because sense is only ever a function of a mind, at terms of understating at least. In both cases it is belief that sorts where one looks for evidence in support of a view, and how one categorises evidence that contradicts or affirms or both the core belief.
It is true that some turn to religion or spirituality as an escape route from pain or grief, or for some other reason that is nothing to do really with the core belief of that person. Those core beliefs can often be suppressed to the extent that such a person doesn’t even open their own internal box to either acknowledge or examine what they are in some cases. Some turn to atheism as well for comfort and escape to the contrary of whatever their internal belief happens to be. So there can be a genuine core belief of theism or atheism, even though some with either of these might have fooled themselves that they are of the opposite belief.
To what extent belief is informed by what is learned and what is learnt is informed by belief is a very complex question which rarely gets any treatment, even though is it of profound importance to all human beings. One might argue that what is believed is a function of truth, truth being contained in how the physical universe works. In other words, core belief is from DNA influencing the brains function which provides groundwork to sort information gained in life. So some people might be spiritual because they inherited it.
On the other hand though, one can also argue that what is perceived to be true is also a function of belief. To this end, the double slit experiment in quantum mechanics can be laid out to show how observation affects the things being observed. Or one can point out that measuring and observing the universe, which is made from the same stuff and affected by the same forces as the instruments being used to make the measurements means that an impartial truly outside view of evidence is impossible. Plus the measuring devices might influence that being measured, considering they are essentially part of it, if all is forces and material. This would mean that for those who are atheists, they must make an assumption at this point that there is nothing outside of the universe.
The semantic arguments over what as absence of belief really means in regard to the word atheist then starts at this point. Transversely what belief really is becomes relevant here also.
All this looks like a perfect chicken and egg scenario of which came first, belief or a world view, a world view or belief? Of course when one considers that even the brain itself is made of the same stuff as the universe, which is probably why we can understand it, the question if anything else exists other than it becomes even more troublesome.
What we call sense and logic may not even apply, or be recognised as such if they do apply in a familiar way if we saw anything that might exist outside of the physical brain and universe. Perhaps then what a searcher for truth needs to look for is the exact opposite then of what we think we should look for. Things then that have evidential criteria that do not make rational sense, might be what has to be looked for. The evidential criteria could not be too strict, less it is part of an already existing world view, but not too wide as to render the word evidence meaningless.
If truth is the target, then a deep knowledge of what knowledge, logic, evidence, rationality and belief actually are is probably going to be essential. Then we might know ourselves better and know where to look next for answers and what an answer really is. To use common parlance, I would look for supernatural or scientific phenomena that doesn’t make sense to common sense. Here I would say is a good place to look albeit carefully and cautiously for answers to the spiritual questions. If this includes the bible then so be it but it might not, or it might include other religious book of other faiths as well. The key is to not close a book at the very least, before it is read.
I hope this is of some value to you jambon1.
