The dictionaries define “to believe” as to have confidence in the truth, the existence, or the reliability of something, although without absolute proof that one is right in doing so. With that in mind, do you believe in evolution? Should you?
To have confidence in the truth of something without absolute proof is not necessarily a bad thing. For instance, you can believe that the most important thing in your life is your family, that there is karma, or that your team will win the World Cup. Let’s imagine a little girl in your neighborhood asks you if the moon orbits Earth. I trust your response will be “the moon orbits Earth”, and not “I believe the moon orbits Earth” because believing something is a personal experience, and what you are expressing is an objective fact.
Not Believing in Science
As far as their professions are concerned scientists do not believe or disbelieve concepts, neither do they encourage others to believe or disbelieve them.
When scientists assert a new theory, they do it not because they believe their theory but because they perceive their theory to be the truth, and that they have enough evidence to prove it.
When scientists state yet-to-be-proven concepts, they don’t share their beliefs with the world, but they want to start a conversation about those. When scientists oppose an established theory, they disbelieve it but because they perceive established theory to be false, and they have enough evidence to prove it.
Scientists either agree that the facts indicate a theory to be the truth so they accept that theory or disagrees that the facts indicate the theory to be the truth so they reject that theory. When they reject theories, they are not expected to suggest new replacement theories, but first, they are expected to exhibit objectively the reason for their rejection.
The question, “Do you believe in evolution?” is not a meaningful question. The meaningful question is “Do you accept or reject the theory of evolution?”