I think that Amesh and I are both using the same definition of faith but have set different boundaries of what faith embraces. To me, faith is not limited to religion or the supernatural. I believe faith can be believing that something is going to turn out as expected. Faith can be trusting that something presumed to function properly will. Some of that is emotionally based but some of it is based on what we know has always happened. For example I know that roller coasters have derailed but I do not know anyone who was on one when it happened so I am more likely to have believe that if I ride a roller coaster I will be safe than had I known someone who on a coaster that derailed. That is logical. Faith and logic often overlap.

Another point is, it used to be people who believed in auras where considered eccentric and I would say the majority didn't believe they existed. (I didn't. I thought it was a Hippie thing)But specialized cameras can capture images of energy fields that fit the description of what those who claimed they saw auras around people saw. Some might argue that this is proof but others might argue that it is hoax. One can even argue if there is proof or not on a good many issues. It is debatable based on opinion, experience, and perception. Theories are proven and again proven wrong quite often. What is proof? There are so many ways to determine proof that proof isn't always equal. If I do the same task every day for a year and get the same result is that proof or if 1,000 people do the same task once and 99% of them get the same result is that proof ? It seems to be a matter of opinion to an extent.