Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
why is proof an insufficient narrative form???'

Oh man.. this is the keystone question.. but I rephrase it.. why some people take some narratives over other when there is some kind of different offers?

Are there some mythologies which are universal? Why are they taken?

So proof in the scientific science is not enough if you are not in a mythical scientific world.

An example. There is an old history about an anthropologists applying science proof in a compeltely different world view... prrof was irrelvant in their society.. they were worried about why?

So .. you can proof something.. like that you had a car accident because of bad brakes ina car.. but in another frame the key question could be why the combination of bad brakes, and bad wetaher and your car having it and you being there happened to you?

Different mythologies have different focus so scientific proof or why explanation or any other question or mythology I may heard of has sense..

But why when there are different options available some people choose one over other?

Finally, rituals based on belief are more powerful in a judeo-christian vision of the world. I am not sure it is teh same in all cultures.. so the answer of this anthropologists may not be really universal.. but very common in society where the one-God is a possible thought (the idea that there is only one God is quite complex and it does not exists in a lot of places... therefore the evangelical "success").

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Wed Mar 7th, 2007 at 05:02:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:

Display:

Occasional Series