DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - What is the role of faith in Buddhism? Do we need blind faith ?

**egershna** · 09-01-2010, 10:43 AM

At what point does evidence establish truth?

At the point of consistent, repeatable data that matches the hypothesis.

For myself, I usually consider something as a possibility when there is a reasonable suspicion that it could exist (kinda redundant I guess).

Doesn't really matter if unicorns or the Flying Spaghetti Monster or hindukarma really exist, there is still this problem of ignorance, greed, and anger leading to suffering, and this solution of the Eightfold Path.

I usually will refer to something as true when there is slightly more evidence in its favor than for the other alternative. I don't mind a low burden of proof because I feel that truth is relative anyway.

I had a friend who was hit by a semi truck on the highway. Was the truth of the truck bearing down upon him really "relative"...? Did the truck really not exist, since he never saw it coming?

However, if someone else only considers something true when evidence is beyond a reasonable doubt, then there idea of verifiable evidence will differ.

Again, a consistently repeatable dataset that supports the hypothesis is plenty good. Fortunately for the hypothesis of the 4NT, there is plenty there.

09-01-2010, 10:43 AM	#28
egershna Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 411 Senior Member	At what point does evidence establish truth? At the point of consistent, repeatable data that matches the hypothesis. For myself, I usually consider something as a possibility when there is a reasonable suspicion that it could exist (kinda redundant I guess). Doesn't really matter if unicorns or the Flying Spaghetti Monster or hindukarma really exist, there is still this problem of ignorance, greed, and anger leading to suffering, and this solution of the Eightfold Path. I usually will refer to something as true when there is slightly more evidence in its favor than for the other alternative. I don't mind a low burden of proof because I feel that truth is relative anyway. I had a friend who was hit by a semi truck on the highway. Was the truth of the truck bearing down upon him really "relative"...? Did the truck really not exist, since he never saw it coming? However, if someone else only considers something true when evidence is beyond a reasonable doubt, then there idea of verifiable evidence will differ. Again, a consistently repeatable dataset that supports the hypothesis is plenty good. Fortunately for the hypothesis of the 4NT, there is plenty there.
	Quote