I'm curious here, and seriously so. The "lazy students" notwithstanding, there is evidence in your post of assumptions that inhibit real knowing. For one, there is implied the notion that science and its studies are conclusive and ever-reliable, which, by evidence of science and both its process and evolution, is not the case. For another, simple/complex are value statements which do not constitute a reliable confirmation of not truth/truth. For another, "myth" does not equal "non-truth," but represents a means of apprehending how life occurs; it is likely non-literal, but not non-truth.

One of the virtues of a double-brain capacity, whatever its ultimate mechanical functioning turns out to be, is that we can aim to pin things down -- that is, delve for facts and interpretive truth -- while SIMULTANEOUSLY refusing to shut the door on possibility; we can hold paradox. That students pick up on myth is not necessarily a bad thing (and not necessarily evidence of stupidity), but an opportunity for deep teaching, for holding out in front of them the complexity of the world and what it means "to know." That this "line of uncertainty" is a decidedly difficult one for people to walk may be a reflection not of brain hemisphere dominance, so-called, but of a VALUE system that fails to emphasize qualities, curiosity, uncertainty as useful principles toward knowing the world and ourselves in it. For my part, when I hear "religious" or "mythologist" people tapping the door of "science," and, more rarely, vice versa, I celebrate the attempt, conscious or otherwise, to bring to life an integral and non-partisan paradigm and process. I am DEEPLY interested in that ... and further, anything short of this may come to be what we, in the future, call the ultimate "lazy."


More Posts