At the same time, I took two humanities electives by accident: a philosophy course, which taught me what atheism brought to its conclusion results in (thank you Nietzche), and a Hebrew scriptures course, which taught me that the scriptures are essentially a story about the nature of God's relationship with humans.

My math courses were also very convicting. Kurt Godel and his proof for the existence of God, and his incompleteness theorem. I couldn't shake the experience, upon learning about Bertrand Russell's failed endeavor, that there must be a foundation for the mathematical reality we know deeper than humans can perceive.

I ended up in seminary and studied philosophy and theology, and finally made my way back to software engineering. 12 years later my life is still full of purpose and growth due to the faith I found then.

While nobody is advocating a return to that particular social structure, would it not be out of the realm of possibility for a similar ethos to be cultivated among leaders and employers?

Funerals aren't about saying goodbye to corpses. They're collective, complex rituals that aid the grieving process.

The way of life the Church offers along with its teachings, are what you might be able to consider the "good bits".

The "bad bits" are the members, who are sometimes clergy, who sin against God and against their neighbor.

> Could there be an afterlife? Sure, it's possible, but there's not yet any significant evidence for one.

First off, you can discount "common stories" all you want, but even science operates on "common stories", i.e. we use a "common" method, record our observations, and make educated guesses about what those observations imply, and share our results. When we begin to come to a "common" consensus, we say the stories line up and that therefore we've likely hit upon some truth.

It's so easy to find the evidence I didn't think I'd have to mention them. Off the top of my head, we can observe the numerous accounts of near-death experiences across cultures and religions which share striking commonalities.

Then you can also point to paranormal phenomena also universal across cultures and religions.

Another line of thought would be to read some Plato, particularly the Phaedo which gives several very convincing arguments for the immortality of the soul.

Fountain pens are supposed to be held lightly, so much so that someone should be able to pull it right out of your hand without friction (apparently schoolteachers once did this to test students' proper grip). Additionally, because of the water-based ink and capillary action of the pen, very little pressure is needed to mark the paper. Fountain pens are also able to be held at a greater angle than most other pens allowing a grip where the pen lightly rests on the back of the hand. This provides the ability to write for long periods without fatigue.

This is in contrast with ballpoints which require a significant amount of pressure to mark and which also cannot mark at the greater angle required which would allow the pen to rest comfortably on the back of the hand. This leads to all kinds of awkward hand positions that people learn to write with (a teacher or student will be able to attest to the numerous hideous and painful hand contortions some students employ) and more rapid hand fatigue because of the pressure required. It is not uncommon for carpal tunnel syndrome to develop in writers of ballpoints, and for doctors to subsequently recommend the switch to fountain pens. I also find that it is considerably more difficult to produce good handwriting using a ballpoint rather than a fountain pen. The hand positioning and technique really makes all the difference.