NetDoc:This indicates that the "concept" you have is flawed for you. Ergo, the concept exists and does not "work". We can mince the etymology of all of this, but the fact that you have a word that represents "God" means that you have some working definition. Now you must assert whether you have faith that he exists (theist), does not exist (atheist) or that you have no stinking clue (agnostic).
Contrary to some opinions, "Faith" is not a four letter word.We all must use it to some degree or withdraw into a shell doing nothing. While it sounds incredibly intellectual to deny that we use Faith or are subject to it, the reality of the situation proves otherwise. Our beliefs are no stronger than the fallacies we prop them up with. The search for truth entails the systematic removal of these fallacies with the result being a better understanding of what is really true. The denial of faith is one such fallacy.
In some respects, Faith can be interchanged with the word "assumption". Here is an excerpt from the wikipedia entry for "theory" (emphasis mine):
[snip]
Arguments or theories always begin with some premises - "arbitrary elements" as Hawking calls them (see above), which are here described as "assumptions". An assumption according to Asimov is "something accepted without proof, and it is incorrect to speak of an assumption as either true or false, since there is no way of proving it to be either. (If there were, it would no longer be an assumption.) It is better to consider assumptions as either useful or useless, depending on whether deductions made from them corresponded to reality.... On the other hand, it seems obvious that assumptions are the weak points in any argument, as they have to be accepted on faith in a philosophy of science that prides itself on its rationalism. Since we must start somewhere, we must have assumptions, but at least let us have as few assumptions as possible."
[/snip]
