> I know lots of people who would disagree Friend, you know some people -- it is a small number even if you are a popular fellow. But let's say, for fun, that

> I know lots of people who would disagree Friend, you know some people -- it is a small number even if you are a popular fellow. But let's say, for fun, that you know millions or even billions of living people. These people, if pressed beyond a superficial level of conformity, would disagree _with one another_ on many points of _dogma_. They would mostly agree to practical compromise with one another and with reality. Doors open, Time passes, flame cooks food, arrows pierce flesh, machines must be repaired with new parts... and let's not fly hijacked aircraft into buildings to defend $ourdeity. In short, these lots of people don't really agree very much among themselves. And some will kill others if they _believe_ enough. There isn't much uniformity of considered opinion among most people, but there is a good deal of pragmatism in action, if not in _word_. > certainly more than half of humans who have lived This argument is a sort of speculative vote by dead parliamentarians. And most of these parliamentarians couldn't even write or do high-school math. The current living human population is larger than any that we can reasonably assume to have existed before. Let's assume that a parliament of 8 billion Homo sapiens is a sufficient indicator of diversity of superstition and practicality. Other genus Homo may have been different, but Homo sapiens may _believe_ and or say just about anything. Homo sapiens is a practical animal that functions rather well given the mix of under-utilised rational capacity and noodles inside its head. But it is clear that nonsense abounds in the human mind.