Knowledge is always partial, always incomplete, always excludes or ignores or denies other possible ways of knowing. Knowledge is best used in a pragmatic way, as a stance from which an encounter with the zone of uncertainty may be grounded. But as we have seen, becoming aware of the limits of human knowing does not mean that experience is solipsistic, or that knowledge systems are all relative the way many postmodernists would have us believe. Experience and knowledge are rooted in neurognostic structures that have evolved to true themselves. Some epistemologies and systems of knowledge tend to be oriented more toward the production of meaning, while other systems keep the models open to the zone of uncertainty, and to dynamic testing in the crucible of experience.
Good science is of the latter type.
These are the evocational, fulfilling and expressive modes of the symbolic function. The links between objects and fields of meaning and action become relatively stable during development. People who insist upon the truth of their favorite ideologies exemplify the down-side of creodic consciousness. From within their rigid frame of reference, what they believe to be true makes sense to them. There is little or no recognition of a zone of uncertainty.