They don’t need belief and faith, they need to trust it. Something that both Republicans and Democrats have eroded because it didn’t fit their narrative.
So you have to be religious to be faithful to your spouse?
No, faith doesn’t refer to religion. You can have faith that your investment works, you can have faith in democracy or the judicial system, and in many other things.
In fact, if you check out what Wikipedia has to say about it, there’s a whole section on “Secular Faith”, which includes faith in e.g. philosophical ideas, ethics, personal values and principles and so on.
Faith is just a strong conviction or trust, that’s how it’s defined. And sure, you can have faith in God. But you can also have faith that the scientific method works and that the amount of published garbage studies is low enough to not break the system.
And this faith can be shaken when learning about meta studies estimating that about 30% of scientific papers are bogus, plagiarized and/or not reproducible.
Or when learning about John Bohannon, and his purposely bogus study on that chocolate helps with weight loss, which he published to show how easy it is to publish nonsense papers, and not only did this study make it onto headlines of newspapers worldwide, but his retraction of the study totally failed to get any publicity at all. He basically couldn’t retract his own study from public knowledge.
And like with religious faith, learning about these issues can either lead to either increased understanding, a shaken faith in science in general or an angry counter-attack.
If you don’t understand everything in every field of science (and it’s impossible to do so), then you have to trust what you cannot prove. And that’s literally the same thing as faith. Because it is faith. You blindly trust something without having proof, just trusting that when someone else claims to have proof, that they actually do have proof.
You seem to have a very narrow and incorrect definition of the word faith, that you place so much faith in, that you don’t even seem to want to look it up in a dictionary.
Your faith in your definition of the word faith goes so far, that you just repeat your incorrect definition and completely shut out any reasoning or any sources that might say otherwise.
Theevidencesayssomethingelse, but your faith in your definition of that word makes it impossible for you to consider any other option.
most people need belief and faith in science because they’ll never understand it
They don’t need belief and faith, they need to trust it. Something that both Republicans and Democrats have eroded because it didn’t fit their narrative.
Faith is a different word for trust. They are synonyms.
Faith specifically refers to religion. Allowing them to use it in regards to science is where we got these loons claiming that science is a religion.
So you have to be religious to be faithful to your spouse?
No, faith doesn’t refer to religion. You can have faith that your investment works, you can have faith in democracy or the judicial system, and in many other things.
In fact, if you check out what Wikipedia has to say about it, there’s a whole section on “Secular Faith”, which includes faith in e.g. philosophical ideas, ethics, personal values and principles and so on.
Faith is just a strong conviction or trust, that’s how it’s defined. And sure, you can have faith in God. But you can also have faith that the scientific method works and that the amount of published garbage studies is low enough to not break the system.
And this faith can be shaken when learning about meta studies estimating that about 30% of scientific papers are bogus, plagiarized and/or not reproducible.
Or when learning about John Bohannon, and his purposely bogus study on that chocolate helps with weight loss, which he published to show how easy it is to publish nonsense papers, and not only did this study make it onto headlines of newspapers worldwide, but his retraction of the study totally failed to get any publicity at all. He basically couldn’t retract his own study from public knowledge.
And like with religious faith, learning about these issues can either lead to either increased understanding, a shaken faith in science in general or an angry counter-attack.
If you don’t understand everything in every field of science (and it’s impossible to do so), then you have to trust what you cannot prove. And that’s literally the same thing as faith. Because it is faith. You blindly trust something without having proof, just trusting that when someone else claims to have proof, that they actually do have proof.
I trust the scientific method, I don’t have faith.
Trust and faith should not be used interchangeably.
Trust means that you have good reason to believe in something.
Faith is just wishing on a star.
You will find that everyone who has faith claims to have a good reason to believe in it.
Faith is trust is believing in something without definitive proof. If you have proof, you don’t trust, you know.
Good reason is subjective. I require evidence before I believe something.
Trust can be placed based on past experiences. I trust my sister will call me. I have faith in nothing.
You seem to have a very narrow and incorrect definition of the word faith, that you place so much faith in, that you don’t even seem to want to look it up in a dictionary.
Your faith in your definition of the word faith goes so far, that you just repeat your incorrect definition and completely shut out any reasoning or any sources that might say otherwise.
The evidence says something else, but your faith in your definition of that word makes it impossible for you to consider any other option.