h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

blub-blub
When you started <> (by the way you may need to correct the end of that first sentence, if I remember it rightly, into the plural - divine beings - you probably meant to say?) I was hoping to read some background on ancient and modern mythological aspects - not only Descartes et al.
I feel that in your introduction could have cast your net wider to encompass some primitive tribal philospophy, or theology, or call it what you will. Gone further back to the roots as it were - echoes in caves, witch doctors, solar eclipses etc. Brought in more of the superstition element. Kind of background wallpaper I'm talking about really. Something to grab the readers' attention.
Anyway I enjoyed the article and it had my thinking - which I guess is the whole point of it. But I feel it needs a little more salt in the soup.
I am therefore I think,
Lucky

Everyone seems to have more issue with the second half of this article. What would you think if I were to split the article into two new ones, one on non-realism, one on our relationship with the outside world? I've raised the same question in the Peer Review thread. If you don't mind please could you respond there? http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/brunel/F48874?thread=1939504&skip=60&show=20 Thanks blub-blub