<< Semantics aside, do you truly see science as an ideology? If so, you're overlooking the fact that science is a mere tool, which can be used in a variety of ways. Even religions (ab)use it to 'prove' that they're right..
Sure, everyone has faith, otherwise one should see no reason to live. There is, however, a moment when faith turns into blind faith, the point where evidence ceases to exist and/or count and one completely believes in something for which no evidence exists. Blind faith, or superstition. >>
I, personally, see science as a way to understand the physical world. But what I'm proposing is that blind faith in science is just as possible as well as prevalent as blind faith in organised religion. And taking that further, the reason it's so mainstream [for lack of a better word] to wield the hammer of science [+5 to physical attacks ] as an ideology is that by it's very nature is secular.
Again, going off on a tangent. ( i'm neffing badly... ) The concept of evidence is rather shaky and I'm not saying that all evidence is wrong, BUT most evidence is created using the Hammer of Science [ -10% all stats for Engligh Crusaders ] so to say that some thing is impossible because it cannot be proven with evidence is not entirely valid because the Hammer [ -10 to mystical defense ] does not account for what it cannot quantify. It's like not acknowlegding something, even though it's there, because you don't know how to classify it. It's called "unexplainable"
For me, if you haven't guessed, I believe in God, but it doesn't mean that I don't see the Hammer and a useful tool for stumbling through this world. I just don't take it as the final word for what is real. I leave that to God.
Who knows, maybe that's the difference: what you see as the final word on what's real and what's not.
interesting nonetheless.