the charge in Plutarch and the OP is that the atheist has faith and the superstitious doesn't.
It seems to me that in the context of this statement, it implies that the atheist has more faith (belief that lacks evidence) than the superstitious, because maybe Plutarch thinks that it takes more power of will to denounce the 'evidence' that superstitious people use to justify their beliefs, and when the superstitious buy into a belief system, they unquestioningly follow it.
In the context of trust, then the superstitious would have more trust and confidence in their belief system, since they have allowed their reason to be overridden by faith [belief in something that lacks evidence], setting a precedent. The atheist would reject it out of logic, not faith.
no subject
the charge in Plutarch and the OP is that the atheist has faith and the superstitious doesn't.
It seems to me that in the context of this statement, it implies that the atheist has more faith (belief that lacks evidence) than the superstitious, because maybe Plutarch thinks that it takes more power of will to denounce the 'evidence' that superstitious people use to justify their beliefs, and when the superstitious buy into a belief system, they unquestioningly follow it.
In the context of trust, then the superstitious would have more trust and confidence in their belief system, since they have allowed their reason to be overridden by faith [belief in something that lacks evidence], setting a precedent. The atheist would reject it out of logic, not faith.