It can but it doesn't have to. I don't think the polarizing is
necessary.
There are elements of fact in fiction and elements of fiction in
fact. Hyperbole, stereotyping, these things create mythologies
of groups of persons who only exist fictionally, but appear to
exist in reality.
For pragmatic purposes, we engage in new mythologies regularly.
For example: in Physics, they deal in points.
Where's a point? What's a point? It's a mythological thing.
Points don't exist.
Neither is there a truly two dimensional object in the Universe
that I'm aware of. They're mythologies, convenient fictions that
make it easier to do the mathematics.
Being mythologies does not make them bad things.
They're useful mythologies.
I think the implication of unreal to myth needs to transform and
be replaced with metaphorical assumptions. Much of myth is
metaphor. Every "thought experiment" is metaphorical - it's not
real.
It's a change of approach. I want to see reconciliation between
divisive groups and i believe it's possible. I expect I'd get
resistance from ALL sides. But I see no reason why you can't
reframe every religions systems as having metaphorical,
practical applications. I also see no harm in reframing every
scientific explanation and "outing" their metaphorical and,
indeed, mythological components
