Ah this takes me back to freshman seminar, when I was an undergraduate so very long ago (the same semester I dissasociated). Much mytholgy was to be covered and discussed (including Judeo-Christian). It became evident that anything that was not Jude-Christian was considered by most of my seminar-mates to be ficitonal stories. There was no empathizing with what the human condition and mind was like thousands and thousands of years ago. People didn't read, they didn't write, and they only knew what their ancestors passed on to them orally. They didn't have a scientific explanation as to why thunder or lightening occurred, so their explanaiton was a god making it happen. If they got an idea to do soemthing or invent something, they attributed it's arrival in their brain to a goddess. If a ship got lost at sea, they blamed an angry god.
The human condition requires that we have understanding of why and how things happen. Absent scientific explanations, others were needed. I cannot bring myself to believe that all the ancient folk before us who believed in the explanations we refer to as myths (which implies untrue-I disagree) were any less understanding "of stuff" than we are. We are told by our teachers why it snows, or why the tides change, and even how we come up with creative ideas (the most mythical-imagination, not muses). It is no different. We trust that the scientific evidence was there for someone to disseminate and we believe it. Our ancient predessors believed the evidence given by their story tellers, in much the same fashion.
It is far more alluring and interesting to think that a little tiff between Artemis and Athena over some god might be the reason a deer got run over last week, than to think that it was drawn out by the light of the full moon, and then when it saw the headlights coming, its instincts forced it to freeze, thus getting herself killed.
Oh crap, I am supposed to be briefing crimes cases right now. Oops