Let´s see if "magical" word will be choosen for the new book, and why(I personally would rather prefer not to).

The first definition of myth I have read when I was a child almost in a greek encyclopedia of myth was similar to that one: a kind of childish "way of answering to our common questions", that science tries to answer too, and with Piaget and the notion of ontogenic as a recapitulation of philogenetic development of human mind, with it´s not fixed strutures, it makes possible to answer in that way. But there are other elements of religion that demand for study too, perhaps those that lead to a very high superstition and seemed not to take any advantage of scientific explanation, do they have to do with ontogenic, personal characteristics?

(Now I was trying to make more justice about someone in the audience on the phone,because I heard the question again and tried to understand better).