[Buddha-l] it's not about belief

[Jim Peavler]

On Jan 3, 2006, at 9:05 AM, curt wrote:
>>
> The idea that 90% of humanity is "able" to hold beliefs without  
> evidence, while the other 10% is incapable of this, assumes that  
> human intellectual history began with the First Council of Nicaea,  
> which it did not. In fact, it nearly ended with the First Council  
> of Nicaea! Prior to that time anyone who believed things without  
> evidence was considered mentally or morally deficient - or both. As  
> they should be.


Oh dear, oh dear. The utterest green horse pucky. I am no  
archeologist or anthropologist, but I know from extensive reading in  
such subjects and in cultural history etc.  that damned near every  
primitive society in the history of the globe show strong evidence of  
believing in things for which there is no evidence: e.g., deer  
paintings in neolithic caves are assumed by most people to indicate a  
belief that doing the paintings and possibly using the paintings in  
rituals assured that hunters would be lucky with deer. American  
aborigines wear dear hides and heads in dances in rituals clearly  
connected to the hunt. I suspect, but cannot prove, that having  
rituals expressing friendliness toward the deer-people actually makes  
them more susceptible to becoming meat for the table.

There is a lot of evidence that a lot of people, including most non- 
xians, believe in things for which there is no evidence. For example,  
I believe that somehow all the letters I write to my national leaders  
about things of the highest seriousness may, somehow someday actually  
make some small difference in things I hold important. I don't have  
any evidence of that so far, however.

Like, for example, kill the patriot  act!!




Jim Peavler

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

     -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
     Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755