Sometimes a small change in the way we define a basic term can have major repercussions on the way we look at the world around us. What happens, for example, if you change the way you look at concepts such as "religion" or "myth"? How might this affect the way we perceive forces shaping the modern and postmodern West? While chapter 1 pursues postmodernism's ethical implications, the issue of euthanasia and the fate reserved for those deemed "unproductive" or incapable of self-fulfilment, following chapters look at a fundamental question: Can a society function without myth? Modern ideologues claim that by the twentieth century much of the West had finally escaped the prison of religion. Many educated Westerners view themselves as secular, free of religion and myth. But this conflicts with an observation supplied by Social Anthropology, that myth is inevitable and plays a critical role in the development of any civilization. This volume looks at a fundamental issue, re-examining the materialistic cosmology shared by modern and postmodern belief systems. It takes a deconstructive look at a cultural monument that many would consider untouchable, that is the theory of evolution. Flight v2 looks at this issue from two angles. First, that of Social Anthropology, asking questions such as: What roles do origins myths play in society? How do they "make sense" of the world? Can parallels be drawn between myth and the theory of evolution? Secondly, we examine parallels between the way myths gain prestige (and shield their beliefs from criticism) and how evolution is marketed. To grasp how evolution's sacred aura has been built up, advances in philosophy of science are examined. For example, when evolutionists oppose criticism of evolution in education, claiming that evolution is science, what does this really mean? If we bring a restricted definition of science into the origins debate, what might be the repercussions?