My understanding of faith is that it is belief despite the
absence of either evidence or any theoretical prediction. Faith is the
lazy thinker's way of not asking anymore questions. Those that defend
faith as a virtue are wrong, Faith is not good. As evidence for this I
propose all the irresolvable conflicts between mutually inconsistent
faiths.
When I read an author I give him a credibility rating which I
get gradually by exposure to his writings. Carl Sagan, Richard Dawkins.
and Daniel Dennet are very high credibility raters in my system. Tory
MPs and my eldest sister score negatively, if they say something is true
then it is evidence that it is not. If I read that Dawkins said perhaps
jesus is lord after all I would assume it was a joke or that
fundamentalist christians had his daughter Juliet buried somewhere with
a days supply of oxygen.
Tony Hindle.
If we want to improve our understanding then considering
the evidence is the best way.
(the evidence for this claim is overwhelming)