# Interpretation of p-value; difference between p=.06 and p=.99

I'm sorry if this is a duplicate, but when looking into the other questions asked, they did not seem to ask specifically the question I'm curious about.

I was wondering how to view p-values. We all have learned that a p-value < .05 is considered significant (according to your alpha level), and if so, you can interpret your results e.g. make a claim about the direction of effect in a regression. However, if you obtain a p-value = .06, it is not considered significant, therefore you cannot make a claim about the direction of the effect (even though you might have plotted a graph that might suggest there is a positive relationship for example).
The same would go is you have obtained a p-value = .99. In both situations, you cannot make a claim about your hypothesis (i.e. reject H0).

I was however wondering now if there is something to say about the p-value of .06. To me, intuitively, it would seem that there is "more evidence" of there being a relationship between your variables in this situation then when obtaining a p-value of .99. Why is this set alpha level of .05 so holy? Why can't we view our p-values as a continuum, the lower the p-value, the more evidence, independent of any cut off?