After the discussion, I felt like the definition for storytelling was really loose and covered a lot so I guess in that sense it could be an important way of knowing. I think that storytelling should include a plot and a conclusion. But not everything has a direct plot so not everything can be turned into a story. Even though I understand with the argument that most things care told in the form of stories and that’s how we learn. I think there are times when we do things instinctively that aren’t told in the form of stories. For example, base instincts, breathing and eating and sleeping. Nobody has ever told us how to breathe, eat or sleep and so we don’t know how to do those things through stories. I guess it doesn’t discredit the argument but I’m just trying to say that I don’t think its the most important way of knowing. I think it is an important way but not the most important way of knowing.
Also storytelling implies that it is non-fiction and that some elements could have been made up or not entirely true. Even though many things are in theory and are not always strictly truth. It shouldn’t be a major way of knowing if there is no certainty.