And THAT is a belief built in collective effervescence (c.f., Durkheim, 1912/1995) bound with affect (the joining of the central [cognitive/reason] and peripheral [affective/heuristic] routes of the Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion; Petty & Cacioppo, 1986) with like-minded scientists that Sagan was around during developmental stages which helped better etch procedural memories via depth of processing (Craik & Tulving, 1975). One cannot escape beliefs so as affect provides a heuristic to better encode, recall, and re-encode learned short-cuts that activate procedural memories. In Sagan’s case, this encoded, and continually re-encoded a (not THE) scientific method’s route(s) to knowledge development.
Whether you WANT to believe or not, it’s important to recognize, appreciate, and understand an artificially selected power of belief in benefitting not only this or that peoples holding a certain view explaining reality, but also this or that view living in reality.
I love Sagan’s perspectives, and appreciate, have learned so much from what Sagan left, and standing on the shoulders of giants, know… that with additional evidence, Sagan too, appreciated… belief… in wanting to know.
Even Neil, you know who, accepted this fact on an episode with a philosopher the same thing out—even Neil had been influenced and exercises belief.
Maybe there’d be less us-and-them, realizing that these pair together. In a democracy however, there are different views pulling the ropes towards future realities wished, subject to those stereotyping cognitive percepts, associated affective prejudices, and executed behavioral discriminations. The difference is, in a democratic republic defending the INALIENABLE rights of the very bodies we had been born to, it is a crime, indefensible to infringe on that very body’s rights born with.
So yeah, snake eats tail Sagan.
For societies—good luck! It just so happens, I’m on the rope that desires H. sapiens as a protective membrane, not a [REDACTED].