Sorry, RAZD, I didn't mean to drag this out to this extent nor mean to interrupt the original OP.
I have given my view on the differences in "faith" and "confidence" as best I can and I see, even within the standard dictionary definitions, the distinctions I assert.
First the minutia. Yes, maps are known to be wrong but my experiences and my evidence is that they are not grossly wrong too often and in most instances are right. I do not need to take the main body of the modern cartographer's art on faith since I have evidence that they are mostly right.
You are an atheist, in spite of no falsification test for the existence of a god, you believe in the result.
Not quite.
I find no logic or evidence to suppose any kind of metaphysical entity exists or is necessary to explain any of our observations. I am atheist (deny the existance of the metaphysical along with Pink Unicorns and planets accreated wholly from cream cheese) only in that there is no compelling evidence to say otherwise. And, no, not even agnostic fits. There is nothing to attempt to falsify. It is a non-issue.
My initial suggestion was that using "confidence" in place of "faith" avoids the pitfalls "faith" embodies in the mind of the religionist. Take it or leave it as you so choose.
™ Version 4.2
