Originally Posted by Mr Tonka
Similarly, even with something more physical and technology based; someone who has never observed nano technology yet believes it exists, has faith in that technology. Now i know you're going to say like a brain, there are devices that allow us to see these things that we can't see with the naked eye. I understand that, but ultimately people who believe in this technology without having seen these things, or used microscopes to view them are taking what has been handed out by the media, textbooks, papers, articles, wikipedia, etc... to be true, by faith. Use trust if the word faith scares you, but it's still faith.
That would be non-scientific. Believing directly in the technology is indeed an example of non-scientific faith.
Scientific "faith" does not work that way. A scientific person does not perceive technology as self-sufficient dogma. A scientific person believes in a significantly different thing: they believe that if the need arises, they will be able to gain access to objective evidence that substantiates the technology in question. A scientific person believes in nanotechnology specifically because they know that they can gain access to the instruments that will allow them to see it with their own eyes (a microscope, if you will), hear it with their own ears and touch it with their own hands.
In other words, this "faith in technology" is critically founded on the understanding that it is not blind
and does not have to be blind
. This "faith" is critically supported by the fact that converting it from faith
into objective knowledge
is a matter of believer's free will.
None of this applies to religious faith, of course.