[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't knowingly believe anything without evidence, so my beliefs are either evidence-based or else I am delusional in that I think the evidence I have mandates a certain belief, but it doesn't.

[/ QUOTE ]
I dont define faith as belief-without-evidence but it is true there is no objective evidence - merely a subjective experience, inaccessible to others. I dont accept this as no evidence, although I concede it is weak, unreliable and worth doubting (especially if it leads to a conclusion contradicting empirically derived beliefs). I think there is a third category of evidence-derived beliefs one has. My route to theism involved discovering I believed in God, not choosing to do so. I can see several obvious naturalistic explanations for my experiences (which psychologically I think I would prefer to be true) - so I am not in the position of thinking the evidence mandates my belief, merely that it supports it, albeit very weakly. Dont you have some beliefs even though you can see that there are alternative explanations for the evidence before you? Ie some beliefs without certainty?

It is also entirely possible (and I would think very likely) that you have a whole bunch of beliefs which arent derived from evidence - I'm thinking of the consequences of cultural, political, psychological or emotional differences that exist between people for example. My comment arose from considering this situation. The question then is, what would happen if one of those was pointed out to you? I'd be skeptical of anyone claiming the ability to "switch off" a belief if they suddenly became aware that there was a gap in their evidence chain (though I expect it would gradually disappear over time).