Charlemagne was very bright, hated superstition, and passed a law that forbade his people to have an open umbrella in the streets, unless it rained water from clouds.

He was shocked when he realized that his people would rather leave his kingdom than obey his new “law.” As a consequence, his tax base began to shrink.

Charlemagne had to think of alternative “supersitious” ideas in order to convince his people to stay. And he invented a tradition, we call today “Pilgrimage” - where people could take a journey, nearby, to visit the relic of a beloved saint and pray.

He probably “died” when the Franks thought this was a grand idea and began to journey all the way to the Middle East, rather than nearby!

[No matter what he did, his plans always backfired on him.]

Science has always been at odds with Superstition. Superstitions are elements that distinguish different cultures.

In the Golden CD sent with Voyager, I would have included something along these lines:

“BEWARE: Human Beings are traditionally very superstitious!”

That’s why I panic….

When you are guided by rational thinking, a lot of people will call you negative or other things because you may not follow the crowd (I can hear the “mooing” now) or you may not accept an idea just because it is popular. An example is all the flack that Al Gore and other environmentalists get over “global warming.” Now there is definitely some uncertainty over the cause of it, but the evidence for global warming is widespread and indisputable, yet many people who do not want to believe it because of its negative connotations will just “bury there heads in the sand,” so to speak.

With all the talk about teaching religion in schools, I propose that we require critical and rational thinking classes instead. Maybe that would help prevent people from inventing evidence where there is none, or from ignoring evidence from things they don’t like.

LS

Also, what Deborah read in those old science books and what Tom sees as a temporary “truth” bring up the issue of how widely accepted truths have real-world consequences—prejudices and fears, whether valid or not, influence laws and regulations.

I had an experience as a young woman that might relate. I used to buy a lot of old science books … say, from a century ago. I began to notice that, although the scientific “truth” being presented barely resembled the scientific “truth” of our time, these truths were stated with a huge amount of conviction … and in the same self-satisfied tone of the film in your post here … or (dare I say it?) of some scientists and journalists of today.

It was pretty mind-expanding for me. I’m glad you’re thinking about - and inspiring us to think about - the subject of a given culture’s “truth.”

Hey! I want to see a picture of you!

Deborah