what is a classical scientist

Or more accurately what am I trying to say by this. Well it is my opinion that the manner in which people get their "truths" can be broken down into two types: the "classical scientist" or the "religious type". That is to say that just because someone is a scientist in profession doesn't mean they can't be a "religious type"
Description
The "religious type" puts things that they "feel" and believe must be true on the "table" and then from that draw their "truths." For instance most faiths start with "god must exist so....". The ideas that usually get on the table tend to come form one's parents and social environment.
The "classical scientist" doesn't have the luxury of this ability to place believes first and draw truth. The classical scientist must place the data of experiments on the table and draws his beliefs from them. This severely restricts what he can believe since if the data on the table doesn't fit a belief it must be abandoned. This means that the "classical scientist's" beliefs might change but his base of knowledge is ever growing and verifiable by anyone anywhere and independent of even human existence.

This is why science is always right (though by science I mean the physical sciences). Putting what you believe first and then looking at the world with that lens is a very skewed way to look at things. The reason is soo trivial it is ignored... what if you are wrong in your belief! Faith is just that belief without proof and so it is by it's very definition prone to being very wrong! You can believe that the world is flat (in everyday life this appears true) but it won;'t make the world flat! So if you lived your life never traveling too far because you where worried about falling off the planet you'd never see the whole world. Get it?