does science require faith to progress?

Does science require faith to progress?

I ask the question without reference to religion.

First a definition of faith. Here is a combination from a few definitions (removing references to religion - the term is used outside religion):

A complete trust or confidence in something based on conviction rather than proof.

Scientists assume as a starting point that the universe is governed by laws (of nature). Do they have absolute and complete confidence that the universe is so governed? They may have a great deal of confidence, but not complete confidence and, in any case, a starting point of a universe without laws would be a place that is impossible to investigate.

That rules out faith - the stand that the universe is governed by laws is not held in complete confidence. It is a convenient starting point.

Does an admittal by scientists that they don't know, destroy science?

To the contrary, I think that if scientists claim that they know everything, would destroy science. Scientists for example don't currently know how the universe started of how life began, and are trying to find out.

That rules out faith. Scientists don't use faith to plug holes in their knowledge.

Do scientists admit that the are wrong?

Very frequently. For example Newton's laws of motion and gravity - these laws are still valuable for most everyday applications, but nonetheless wrong.

Scientists don't put faith in scientific theories. In fact more acknowledgement is gained by disproving the the status quo than in supporting it (the status quo).

That rules out faith. They are continually trying to disprove and replace theories as knowledge increases.



Conclusion: science is not a faith based approach.