Click here to go back to Joe Bill's page.
Joe Bill (c)April 19, 2001
In an attempt to gain acceptance of the concept of faith used to facilitate Creationism, it is often asserted that within the scientific realm there are vestiges of faith of the same sort. Hopefully, the following paragraphs will serve to lend some insight on the matter, and debunk the often-utilized malapropism.
If we define faith as �that which we believe in but cannot see,� we found ourselves in the rather precarious predicament of a category that can contain numerous occurrences of things that are held to be fact based off the amount of evidence of their existence. For example, I don�t have faith that the wind will blow. I have evidence that tree limbs sway, and that an anemometer will give a numeric equivalent to the invisible force causing the motion. I can feel the effects on my skin, and can observe it rustling through hairdos, which sometimes causes women great distress. In short, I can both qualify and quantify the existence of wind, though I cannot directly see it. The evidence suggests there is a force out there that blows things around at x mph. I can call this phenomenon �plywood� instead of �wind� but I know that indeed there is some force out there that causes things to move. I don�t have to literally �see� something to know it exists, if I can qualify and quantify it using reliable methods.
Another example is gravity. I don�t have faith in the fact that gravity will pull me down. I know that the earth spins and has mass, and these two combinations have the effect of a force that holds me tight within the earth�s atmosphere. If I want to, I can calculate the speed at which I will descend to the planet from high in the atmosphere, and I can calculate the amount of gravity exerted on other things by the earth, and vice versa. I can observe that if I jump up, I will inevitably end up back on the ground. I know there is a force behind all this. I could make up a name like �taffy� but I will more pragmatically refer to it as �gravity�. Again, I can qualify and quantify this phenomenon, and the evidence indicates its existence.
Evolution I can directly observe from one species to the next. If I want, I can calculate (based on information of the family) what their offspring will most likely look like. I can look at the fossil record and observe a lizard without wings, and then suddenly one with wings. I can examine lizards that are more mammalian than reptile. I can see that a change occurred from point A and point C and point B has characteristics of both creatures. I can qualify evolution, and with the tool of genetics, I can quantify it.
There are things out there that I can neither qualify nor quantify, and one of these concepts is God. I can take a cursory glance at the earth and proclaim �Something must have made all this, and that must be God,� but I have only assumed this. Unfortunately, I don�t have any Godometers, or any directly observable effects that could only be contributed to an omniscient presence. I can neither qualify nor quantify God. If I do, I do so of my own perception, which could be fundamentally flawed. In instances where one can neither qualify nor quantify something based off of good, unbiased evidence; faith steps in.
We then get a new more refined definition of exactly what faith is. Before, we could describe things that were factual with the term faith, which seems a direct contradiction to its common applications. Now we have a definition that throws out facts and describes something that is necessary to believe if one is to accept something without any kind of definite evidence. In other words, faith is something that allows a belief to exist without any sort of evidence to back that belief.
Science does not support a belief without good evidence. (When I say �science,� I deliberately exclude the creationism branch, as it seems that the goal of that particular branch is to start with a conclusion and provide evidence that confirms that conclusion later.) Since science doesn�t support a belief without evidence, faith is absent by the new definition of the word. Creationists would have you believe otherwise.
Creationists often try to semantically twist words to gain acceptance in the scientific realm for their beliefs. The scientific community excludes faith, and an attempt at trying to pass faith off onto science is a cry for acceptance and validation by something other than faith. Faith is absent in science.
So, the next time you find yourself lost in a miasma of faith in science, you can rest easy knowing that �You can�t have faith in science�.
Go to the message board!
Click here to go back to Joe Bill's page.
