There exists not any reason, why one shall select a model that is observed to likely contain failing|haphazard predictions, (i.e. belief ...) instead of one that is observed to likely contain empirical, testable sequences (i.e. science).

Quite the delicious food for thought

Scientifically scintillating "non-beliefism" book: Stop believing in everything" on Amazon.

Non-beliefism premise

Belief may constitute non-science.

Science in contrast, shan’t encode non-science.

…ie scientific evidence shan’t contain non-scientific-evidence.

Thereafter, it is non-scientific to believe.

/ NOTE I

Simply, it is non-scientific to believe, as the concept of belief allows non-science, whilst science allows not non-science.

Therein, one need not contact a paradigm, observed to likely express non-science (i.e. belief), whence science persists.

/ NOTE II

To express that one must believe, is to express that there exists one moment for which science is not applicable, while one cannot avoid approaching that moment.

In simpler words, to express that one must believe in something, is to express that there must be some event where:

(i). Science is not applicable (i.e. merely belief is applicable)

(ii). Where (i) occurs, in which one has no choice but to apply belief.

Given that no data appears to demonstrate (ii) as valid, it is thereafter false that one cannot exist absent belief in something .

/ END NOTE

Regardless of the instance, that I had cognized of the paradigm, as described via non-beliefism, prior beings had engendered similar description:

Robert A. Wilson (1932-2007?): "Don't believe anything. Regard things on a scale of probabilities. The things that seem most absurd, put under 'Low Probability', and the things that seem most plausible, you put under 'High Probability'. Never believe anything. Once you believe anything, you stop thinking about it."

Neil deGrasse Tyson (2013): "The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it" (source)

Jim Walker (1997-2015?): "History reveals that the consequences of beliefs have created mental barriers to understanding and has caused ignorance, misery, violence and war. Do humans need beliefs at all?" (source)

Notably, a system (that lacks high concern for evidence, i.e. belief), fundamentally opposes a system that has no such lacking. (i.e. scientific methodology)

facebook.com/nonbeliefism