There's a causality issue that you're skirting, however. You keep coming back to "things are just too complex so we oversimplify and construct a narrative." Simply put, you're at "IF complexity THEN oversimplification." The evidence doesn't bear that out. So what you think is a fact matters less than what you can demonstrate as a testable hypothesis. That's why I linked to the Jonah Lehrer book - these hypotheses have been tested, and they have come up with the explanation for "rational disagreement" that I've put forth. So as "nasty and philosophical" as your claim may be, it's a guess. On the other hand, here's the abstract for an actual experiment that disproves your hypothesis. It's described on pp. 206. In the end, you're still coming back to "we just can't figure out the truth" when the actual mechanism is "we actively ignore the truth when we don't like it." Do you see the difference?