Yes, Bill, 1. is now, 2. was then.

  --ED



--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, <billsm...@...> wrote:
>
ED,

The first scenario coheres NOW to our worldview NOW.  The second
scenario coheres best THEN.

Â…Bill!



Bill,

The difference is that the first scenario coheres with our overall
collection of beliefs (our worldview), whereas the second scenario does
not.

--ED





--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
</group/Zen_Forum/post?postID=cN6H_J3CxRpnN49GUJsEtcyK3TmflIwAsU-_Nkj41T\
Ww1pZDCW6vo7bmIABxjlrd-PXD92jwgAjR-E4yeu-dh_anh3w_> , <billsm...@...>
wrote:
>
> Mike,
>
> What is the difference between these two scenarios?
>
> 1. TODAY: A man is accused of rape and murder. He is brought to trial
by jury. Semen is found in the body of the woman. DNA is extracted from
the accused and from the semen. A DNA expert comes into court and
testifies that the samples are a match. The jury believes the DNA expert
and convicts the accused.
>
> 2. 300 YEARS AGO: A man is accused of rape and murder. He is brought
to trial by jury. A priest comes into court and testifies that he cut
open a cat and saw in the entrails that the man was guilty. The jury
believes the priest and convicts the accused.
>
> ...Bill!



Reply via email to