William Morder via trinity-users wrote:

> Myself, I feel that it is part of being a cultured and well-read person,
> to be acquainted with how people thought and believed about the world ...
> even if it doesn't fit in with our modern science. The question isn't
> whether you "believe in it" or not, but whether you can empathize with
> another person's experience of the Universe.
> 
> This would have run on to a much longer rant (all my pet peeves rolled
> into one), but I'll try to keep in short.
> 
> There is poetry and grace in that shadowy side of human culture. Take 95%
> of songs, stories, poems, the arts, and most of them play on what we might
> call superstition. There is a kind of magic and poetry about science, too,
> when we consider the mysteries of quantum physics or higher mathematics or
> DNA or what-not, but it doesn't usually make for interesting music or
> stories.
> 
> Science fiction: now THAT's bor-ing. The same with ultra-religious art,
> the same with polticized art, the same with anything that is too much of
> the same thing. The element of magic, in a story, opens doors where there
> were none. It lifts our spirits, makes like bearable. One doesn't have to
> "believe in it" to appreciate it.
> 
> And I will say no more. So there.

This is why I said science and light. Science for what we/I know and light
for the rest that we/I don't know. The known is just a tiny fraction of the
unknown.