Talk:Informed faith

I protest the very existence of this article. It is a painful neologism—an artificial attempt at creating a false dichotomy between faith and informed faith. The very aim of this article does nothing but highlight the only consistent failing of atheists: their desperate attempt to differentiate themselves from everybody else as "rational". 05:18, 2 July 2008 (EDT)
 * I must tentatively agree. In my opinion, they are seperate things, but not as different as the two articles suggest, and definitely not different enough to justify having two articles. 05:21, 2 July 2008 (EDT)
 * I'd suggest the concept described here is better covered by the term 'confidence'. -- 05:40, 2 July 2008 (EDT)
 * While on the subject of faith articles (or, indeed, articles of faith) I feel that we are missing a significant Article Creation Drive opportunity. Might I suggest articles on "Vague faith", "Uninformed faith", "Weak faith" and "Et cetera faith" ?--Bobbing up 05:48, 2 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Indeed! And once we have those down, we could branch into Conservative Faith, Liberal Faith, Moderate Faith, Radical Faith etc. The opportunities are virtually endless! -- 05:52, 2 July 2008 (EDT)
 * I'd agree with AK above that "confidence" is virtually a synonym for what I was writing about in the original version. If it seems worth having an article saying why we have "faith/confidence" in properly done science (& math) even when we don't understand it, what would be a good title?  ħ uman  20:14, 2 July 2008 (EDT)
 * Actually, whatever you were trying to say in "Informed faith" would be better in Credibility. We trust that scientists are telling us the truth, even if we don't wholly understand the mechanics of what they are telling us, because of their credibility.   13:22, 3 July 2008 (EDT)