Reply to comment

So the art of summarizing our discussions in class resembles summarizing the meaning of life. Our conversations spanned from the to and fro of the reality of reality to the perception of science. We didn't really talk very much about the revision of stories, but more about what the books we read meant to us. Tuesdays discussion resembled last weeks in the topic of Galileo. DId we like or dislike him, and did that matter because of what he did for science and the world.

A lot of students had the same general idea of revision of stories, it happens and we generally like it. But when we got the revised story of Flatland (revised in that it revises our previous thoughts of the world) it confused most of us. The compreshension factor of dimensions, the universe, and other worlds ate up most of our class time. The explanation/story/possibility of different dimensions in close proximity to us opens our mind a little bit further. DO we want to believe in this possibility and be dissatisfied the rest of our lives, or live contentedly in our own familiar world. Basically, it comes down to what story do we want to believe?