(February 8, 2010 at 6:32 am)starbucks Wrote: Unless the atheist actually tested these scientific facts him/herself to make sure they are indeed factual, I would think that there has to be some small amount of faith from the atheist to put all trust in another scientist's work.
Take for example when we as the consumers willingly consume drugs that the pharmaceutical companies put out. We are putting our trust into their hands. We claim that everything they do is based on scientific study which produces factual results. But we ourselves, don't really know just how much of their work is legit until months later when the side effects aren't so rosy. The only factual thing about their research is that it yielded some negative effects. Maybe even too dangerous for human consumption.
When you turn on the light, you do not 'believe' in the act of the light bulb lighting - and if it does not light, it is not a paradigm shattering event. You have a rational expectation based on previous experiences backed up by your understanding, however flawed, of the situation.
For the same reasons, one consumes drugs prescribed by a physician with the expectation that the drug is tested by the FDA to be safe for humans, the physician knows what s/he is doing, etc,. That is the nature of informed consent and all other informed decisions. And there is capacity for error and unforeseen circumstances built into the system as you are, by the nature of the situation, making probabilistic decisions anyways.
Stop equivocating faith in the unproven and unverifiable with rational expectations that can be verified and proven under contextually related conditions.
