Best Of

Well I was on jury duty for two and half weeks and at the beginning of the trial the judge provided the 3 key points to look out for when assessing the evidence and testimonies given by the complainant and the defendant ...

Credibility, reliability, and plausibility the key considerations in weighing the evidence presented by both the complainant and the defendant.

We (the jurors) had to evaluate the trustworthiness, consistency, and reasonableness of the evidence and testimony to determine the facts of the case and reach a fair and just decision.
At times it was tough going, working our way through all the evidence, the mind would chop and change between guilty, not guilty and unsure ...

After two and half days of brain gymnastic deliberation ...we finally came to a unanimous agreement...

Which got me thinking...

Credibility, reliability, and plausibility also applies when approaching the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path...

Credible: In the context of the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path, credibility refers to the believability or trustworthiness of these teachings. Are they based on sound reasoning, empirical evidence, or authoritative sources within the Buddhist tradition? The credibility of these teachings may be assessed based on their consistency with other Buddhist scriptures, the teachings of respected Buddhist teachers, and their ability to address the existential concerns and experiences of practitioners.

Reliable: Reliability pertains to the consistency and dependability of the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path in producing desired outcomes or transformations in individuals who practice them. Can these teachings be relied upon to lead to the cessation of suffering and the attainment of enlightenment, as promised in Buddhist doctrine? The reliability of these teachings may be evaluated through personal experience, as well as the experiences of other practitioners over time.

Plausible: Plausibility refers to the degree to which the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path are reasonable and sensible within the context of Buddhist philosophy and psychology. Do these teachings resonate with human nature and the observable phenomena of suffering and its causes? Are they coherent and compatible with other aspects of Buddhist doctrine, such as the law of karma and the nature of reality? The plausibility of these teachings may be assessed through logical analysis, philosophical inquiry, and introspective reflection.

I guess, one would have to see for themselves "Ehipassiko" ...