Wikipedia says it was over 400 years from the death of the Buddha, until the scriptures of the “Pali Canon” were written down. It would almost be miraculous if anything factual survived 400 years of being told and re-told by the spoken word alone.
It strikes me as false to equate low likelihood of factual validity, and any information in the scriptures is warped to the point of being false. Is this fallacious reasoning?
I think the arguments of the dissidents and contemporary critics would be warped by necessity, but their central arguments would still be expressed. A refutation cannot satisfy majority of the targeted audience if it doesn’t contain enough of the proposition’s truth.
Wikipedia says it was over 400 years from the death of the Buddha, until the scriptures of the “Pali Canon” were written down. It would almost be miraculous if anything factual survived 400 years of being told and re-told by the spoken word alone.
It strikes me as false to equate low likelihood of factual validity, and any information in the scriptures is warped to the point of being false. Is this fallacious reasoning?
I think the arguments of the dissidents and contemporary critics would be warped by necessity, but their central arguments would still be expressed. A refutation cannot satisfy majority of the targeted audience if it doesn’t contain enough of the proposition’s truth.