A doctor told a programmer friend once, "I have to fix problems that God gave us. You have to fix problems you give yourselves."
Edit: granted, this still can happens when self-medicating. The general case of doctors fixing the mistakes of doctors is different than what the parent suggests.
In a general sense that is true but in a more specific sense it is definitely possible to be handed a project without docs and horrible problems and it might as well be an organic problem. Even so, the simplest biology dwarfs the largest IT systems in complexity.
Well said.
And also mercifully in continuous real-world testing over time with no Big Rewrite to be seen. While an individual organism might have unsolvable problems, nature doesn't have the same tolerance for utterly intractable systems that we sometimes see in the software community.
edit: a thanks in advance to all you enlightened fervent atheists for the down votes.
Edited to be more honest.
edit: original response claimed it took courage to doubt the existence of a creator. It has since edited out to claim it simply takes intellectual curiosity. I would argue that the same intellectual curiosity could have the end result of someone having a belief in a singular creator of reality.
Possible, but not likely, given how many intellectually curious people have independently reinvented atheism but no religion has been independently reinvented.
edit: misunderstanding of mutually exclusive and added some more words.
This denies the existence of Ancient Greek atheists, and people who were skeptical of religion in general before the modern era.
I'm also not alone: My definition of the word seems to be the most common one among the current atheist movement.
I was digging at the idea that someone would accept a claim on Faith, then demand evidence before giving up the idea, and how that is inconsistent. If someone can faith into an idea without evidence it should be equally easy to faith out of it with no evidence.
That it's not easy, is interesting.
Nothing -> belief in God, costs little and gains much.
Belief in God -> no belief, costs much and gains little.
Where by costs and gains, I include social acceptance, eternal life, favourable relations with a powerful being, forgiveness of sins, approved life habits, connections to history and social groups, etc.
It's not a Boolean. Or at least, from inside a mind it doesn't feel like a Boolean.
edit: I would also like to add, although I already said it, that I believe both of these opinions regarding the creator are acts of faith, to absolutely say there is not one and to absolutely say there is, and if someone where to have made a statement as if a creators existence was a sure thing I would have called them out just the same.
I'm just saying you'd expect these doctor types to have the greater powers of analysis, but in my experience they just pretend harder.
[Edit to remove that off putting stuff]