Here's a thingie me and a mate came up with one day while chatting with a couple of friendly guys from the uni God Squad. This is an abridged version of the explanation we wrote - if it is patchy I apologise and can clarify later.
"Humans are poor judges of truth"
The simple premise for this is that people all over the world disgree with each other. Let's examine two people of equal age and similar mental capacity who happen to disagree on a particular idea. Let's say each of thier views cannot co-exist (ie: god or no god). We can say that they have been lead to believe what they believe because of the experiences they have had in life so far. This is fair. However, one of them is wrong (it could actually be both of them but the point is that they can't both be right). So we can say that having some experiences doesn't make you a very good judge of truth. If you had MORE experience(s), you might be a slightly better judge of truth, and indeed, we call this "wisdom". But you can still disagree with someone else of equal experience etc, so you are still not capable of correctly judging truth.
The only way we could be sure that someone is a fair judge of what is true and what isnt, is if they had had all experiences that ever were and ever would be, AND were able to discern the difference between misleading experiences and "correct" ones. This is clearly no-one*. So, because we are not fit to judge what is true, it does not make sense to try to disprove or denounce another persons 'truth'. Indeed, it's just plain unfair to hold your own truth in a higher reguard to someone elses, let alone to try to impress your truth onto another person.
From this we can form the concept of "Good Ideas". Any idea that is useful in explaining phenomena (say, a scientific thoery) or that is an elegant and simple explanation for something which we would otherwise be lost to explain (say, a myth or creation story) or that simply provides an better reasoning for observations makes a Good Idea. All Good Ideas should be worth keeping, according to our principle that no-one is fit to judge which is a better idea.
So, in conclusion, if it works and you're happy with it, good for you. The most important thing to draw from this is that it's not cool to press your own Good Ideas over someone else's.
As I said this is quite abridged and may have a couple holes. I think our original essay was quite good, it went into more detail about the nature of truth also. If anyone wants, I'll dig it up for them.
*no mere human, at least
