Reply to comment

Now, where did the class get this week? It is difficult to make any concrete conclusions, as we spent much of our class time sharing different opinions. On Tuesday, we expressed a variety of reactions to our assignment to analyze our own fairytales and agreed that each re-telling of our personal story functioned differently and presented different challenges. We also analyzed a couple of the class’s analytical papers, which prompted myriad reactions as we each read the two explicated fairytales differently. On Thursday, we discussed the pros and cons of using personal experiences as evidence, particularly with respect to some of science’s stories that modern educated society generally accepts: the earth is round, it revolves around the sun, evolution exists, etc. We then discussed Brecht’s re-telling of Galileo’s story, using the text and the leftover thoughts from our fairytales unit to supplement our arguments.

A few themes and ways of thinking highlight our progress from last week. We applied our knowledge and opinions of fairytales to interpreting a text from our new unit on science’s stories. The very personal approach that my peer highlighted in last week’s summary was pivotal to Tuesday’s conversation, but we shifted to a somewhat more evidence-based approach on Thursday. Finally, we ended the week with a classmate’s idea, supported fully by this week’s diverse discussions: “the truth is fluid.”