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.