Where I disagree here is the idea that my view is “disbelief.”
To me, believing or not is irrelevant. I don’t call a lack of evidence “disbelief,” it’s simply a lack of data.
I wouldn’t make decisions based on not knowing.
I wouldn’t plan to drive on interstate 90 to get to my destination if I wasn’t sure it existed.
I don’t consider the rationality of assuming something is to assuming something isn’t to be equal.
If my friend says “I have a million dollars in my trunk, but I can’t open it to show you” I can safely dismiss the remark as “unlikely“ without investing a lot of hope into the unlikelihood of my friend actually having a million dollars in their trunk. I certainly wouldn’t start telling all my friends and relatives about the money in the trunk that I have faith in being there.
Could my friend be telling the truth? Sure! But I see no reason to take those words at face value. And disbelief of that story isn’t on an equal level of rationality of belief in it.
Now, if my friend opened the trunk and showed me the money, I could absolutely accept that reality, even though the outcome was extremely unlikely.
Essentially, I don’t agree with the religious that faith as a concept is a desirable human trait.
Religions don't necessarily have the idea that faith as a trait is desirable. That very much depends on the religion.
However, every single day we make decisions based on not knowing. We make those decisions with the best available evidence at hand, both observable and non-observable. To wit, in your example I'd never drive on the interstate 90 to a non-existent destination, but you'd take the drive not knowing what you might encounter along the way; hence the road trip.
I can't prove the existence of a deity. Equally I can't prove the lack of existence. Today I can prove certain phenomena that in the past we were unable to prove. That didn't stop belief, it merely asterisked it.
To me, believing or not is irrelevant. I don’t call a lack of evidence “disbelief,” it’s simply a lack of data.
I wouldn’t make decisions based on not knowing.
I wouldn’t plan to drive on interstate 90 to get to my destination if I wasn’t sure it existed.
I don’t consider the rationality of assuming something is to assuming something isn’t to be equal.
If my friend says “I have a million dollars in my trunk, but I can’t open it to show you” I can safely dismiss the remark as “unlikely“ without investing a lot of hope into the unlikelihood of my friend actually having a million dollars in their trunk. I certainly wouldn’t start telling all my friends and relatives about the money in the trunk that I have faith in being there. Could my friend be telling the truth? Sure! But I see no reason to take those words at face value. And disbelief of that story isn’t on an equal level of rationality of belief in it.
Now, if my friend opened the trunk and showed me the money, I could absolutely accept that reality, even though the outcome was extremely unlikely.
Essentially, I don’t agree with the religious that faith as a concept is a desirable human trait.