Plenty of room for faith, Anastasia? Based only upon our ignorance?
Given human history with so many faith-based assumptions proven in error, and not one instance of reliable evidence on which to presume the efficacy of any faith, for what possible reason should we continue to put any faith in any faith?
But, then, that is the nature of faith, isn’t it. It comforts one in one’s ignorance. However, to tie this in more closely with the present thread, we have seen that faith of any sort, in any philosophy religious or secular, often precludes acceptance of evidence contrary to the precepts of that faith. In our history it is only recently that many organized faiths have been dragged, kicking and screaming against their will, into the realization that the earth orbits the sun and that evolution is real.
For the majority of our history Humanity has been ruled, in large measure, by the dictates of organized religion and articles of faith from Christian, Jew, Moslem, Hindu, Confucian, Democrat... For all the good “science” specific monks and priests have achieved over the millennia we see that only those discoveries that do not threaten the articles of faith are accepted. Those discoveries that challenge a sacred dogma, regardless of the strength of evidence, are rejected and their proponents ill treated, hanged, burned, given really nasty looks, etc. Only with the rise of secular law in the last few centuries protecting explorers from being eaten by religionists has our knowledge expanded unfettered. The “culture of ignorance” was and is real.
How can anyone not accept the proposition that religion has in the past and can be presumed from this history to be so inclined in the future to foster a “culture of ignorance?”
™ Version 4.2