Is science really a mythology ?
>----------------------------------------<00(O)00> ----------------------------------------<
Eliot classifies science as a myth on the basis of the changing paradigms that the scientific method evolves, and in the expectation that all current theories are temporary, and will eventually be replaced by better ones.

I have some doubts about this:- one could also say that science is an agreed reality for all of society, whereas sacred myths form an agreed reality only for their adherents, and the other types of myth do not form a reality with any agreement at all, except for the individuals who find meaning in them.

However, one can also say that quantum theory is mythical to nearly all of society except for a few High Priests of science, but most members of society would subscribe to their theories and agree with them, so perhaps it IS valid to call science a myth !! (at least to most people). There is no serious disagreement with the scientific system nowadays. However, science only deals with what it is willing to deal with ("how does acupuncture work ?" is a good question to ask any scientist. You will find they are unwilling to answer - they will not deal with it scientifically, and they may even claim that it is a myth !)

Eliot deals only with the physical sciences, where the paradigm is testable by experiment. He does not mention the Social Sciences or other academic fields, but I am sure he would also include their theories as myths, especially as they are not always testable or verifiable at all.

>----------------------------------------<00(O)00> ----------------------------------------<

Previous Mythology Start Page Whatever Will Be Home Page