Thank you for your analysis. I appreciate you putting your thoughts to the matter.
I’m basically a pragmatist and consider myself a reasonable (classic definition) man. The reasonableness of mathematics, physics and all the sciences aren’t a question for me.
My concern is societal. My bias is that I am anti-division.
Idealism can cause divisions in society, because ideals only match realities insomuch as those who map their ideologies ONTO reality say they do.. consequently rejecting the rest.
“that which doesn’t fit into our model of reality, is fiction”
I don’t worry about the pragmatic, reasonable individual
I worry about the fringes gaining greater and greater influence over society, media, whose ideas are becoming embedded in the thought processes of students whose conceptualizations will power future societies goals and aims.
I’ve seen some of the problems it’s caused in my own lifetime. I’m 43 years old. I watched the switch in attitude from Carl Sagan’s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panentheism view of the Universe that I grew up with, to Neil deGrasse Tyson’s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism – not that he invented it by any means; just as Carl Sagan didn’t invent his view of the Universe…
…but these are trends in society that affect the attudes of each of us towards each other in ways that can become like an ax cutting across lines.
The answer is reasonableness. But we’re moving away from that as a trend and I hope it doesn’t continue. I also can’t change it much, except by posting messages on message boards. My opinions don’t have the weight of a Tyson, just as they don’t have the weight of a Sagan, whose opinions influenced my outlook towards things. [as did Joseph Campbell.. we’re products of our childhood influencers].
Joe C. very astute with regards to Kuhn – I had forgotten about Kuhn and in a quick Wikipedia search, I could’ve simplified everything I said by saying “Kuhn”; I need to re-read what he wrote again. Thanks for the pointer there.