My perception of the World: A Response

Someone on orkut recently asked me

"...i can't wait more to listen your thoughts and idealogy by which you percept the world,so what attracts your imagination and reasoning sessions the most and what do you think is the most wrongly interpreted concept of the present age."

I wrote a response, and of course I have not spent ages thinking about it, so I am hoping it would be treated as such.

I am not really an original philosopher (at least not as yet), therefore I cannot provide you with a unique insight and ideology that can be associated with me. However, I must say that I do prefer the scientific method of investigation above anything else for understanding various problems. From scientific method, I do not just mean merely the knowledge of sciences, (even though they do play their part), but also the manner in which the science evolves to seek various truths with more objectivity compared to any dogmatic claims passed on to us by our societies, cultures, religions.

I consider that a person at birth does not have a choice as to select all these above mentioned parameters and more, and by merely happening to be at a certain geographical location with a certain ethnicity in a certain class is a product of a probabilistic outcome. I wish to rise above these prejudices (at least I try to), to try to be objective in ascertaining what is really true and what criterion I use to seek the distinction between what I deem as right and wrong.
Also, with time I have realized how various groups, organizations, communities and cultures intentionally and unintentionally paint a rosy picture of a concept to which they subscribe. I have become positively skeptic in trying to view all sides of a story and not only consider something true which has been fed to me from childhood. This has a benefit of not only increasing my knowledge about various issues (as a side effect), but also helping me form a more complete picture of a concept and to identify if some hidden agenda has been at play to corrupt my conscience and mind or is it actually as I've been told it is.

Hence, my first response to any information (new or old), that I've been told is to ask the person, what are their sources, how authentic are those sources, why should I consider those sources authentic and what makes those sources special or convincing enough to be given any consideration. In my opinion at present age the most wrongly interpreted concept is the inerrancy of any religion be it Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism. Any person considering a certain piece of text as completely inerrant, treating it literally as the criterion to distinguish between right and wrong, good and bad etc. is more likely than not is a product of the various probabilisitc factors, mentioned above. However, such dogmatic mindset cannot entertain any alternate or new thoughts and is immune to any criticism, cynicism and skepticism.

There is obviously a large spectrum between complete literalists, to so called (self-perceived) moderates, to prudent (and/or confused) liberals to complete free thinkers. But, I feel that until the minds of human beings are not unfettered with these dogmatic chains (which, may or may not be practically achievable), the civilization of humans would always stumble across various obstacles, where the conscience in people (who are lucky enough to possess it), is overridden with words perceived to be written in stone.