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