Reply to comment

     I found this first week of discussion very interesting. As we continued the discussion on evolution as a way of being, I found many questions forming in my head. I understand the importance the role of history plays in explanations for why things are here, but I find more comfort in the idea that history cannot explain everything and that chance, opportunity and maybe even destiny are explanations for some occurrences. One example, we talked about was how we as individuals got here. Though there is a story or "history" that may explain how my parents met, got married, etc. The first answer off the top of my head was "by chance". It may be odd that I find more comfort in the unexplainable but I think randomness, chance and opportunity are all very important aspects of science.

    Within this conversation we flowed into the realm of loopy science and "the crack". I really like the crack because it explains why we all may have differing views on the same observations or even evolution. I for one view evolution as a opinion or story. To some it may be more than that and vice versa if it was the story of creation. What this really made me think of is the connection between science and literature. I couldn't get a grasp on how the two may be connected but our talk makes me think about the way in which people view works of literature as stories and fiction often times but contrastingly view science as some kind of truth. I was for some time one of those people and now I think I've slowly moved to viewing these "facts" in text books as very good stories that too with time may change.

    Where the crack fits in this idea of the river I have not yet pieced together or thought too much about, but I have found that I find much more comfort in questioning, striving to be wrong, and that change is inevitbale.