The Concept of Myth and the Science of the Other (original) (raw)
Related papers
2013
In search of a scientifically useful minimal definition of the term "myth", this article traces the development of the concept from the cultural environment of classical Greece, in which it was born, until its modern use in the framework of socio-anthropological studies. Of all the terms of the vocabulary of religious anthropology "myth'' is certainly the most used one. Unfortunately, its wide-spread use is directly proportional to its indeterminateness. Moreover, it regards not only the everyday lexis (what is exactly intended, when, for instance, people call an actor or a soccer player "mythic"?), but also academic communications: various authors can intend by this concept diametrically opposed things.
Myth and Science: Their Varying Relationships
Religion Compass, 2009
The relationship between myth and science is a subject as old as that of myth and science themselves. The position on the issue taken by modern theories of myth can be divided chronologically by the centuries. In the nineteenth century, myth and science were commonly taken to be incompatible. One could not consistently accept both. Because moderns were assumed to be scientific, the choice had already been made for them: they had to abandon myth. In the twentieth century, by contrast, myth and science were usually taken to be compatible, so that one could consistently accept both. Moderns were still assumed to be scientific, but myth was now re-characterized to accommodate science. Only recently, with the rise of postmodernism, has the deference to science assumed by both nineteenth-and twentieth-century theorists been challenged. This article concentrates on the varying positions on myth and science taken in both centuries by those for whom myth and science intersect rather than diverge. Whether, as the 'mission' of the twenty-first century, myth can be brought back to the world-the world explained by science-is finally considered with the case of Gaia.
Exploring the nature of myth and its role in science
Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 2007
The scientific study of myth is dominated by a paradigm that recognizes myth as having been viewed as truthful narrative history by past traditional cultures and yet is considered false or otherwise suspect by the modern scholars who study myth. Although virtually all scholars recognize that myth was of critical importance for traditional cultures, the attempt to elicit scientific reasons for this importance has led to many competing theories, few of which place an emphasis on the validity of myths as representing the product of actual observed historical natural events. This paradox may hinder our understanding of the origins of myth and prevent us from fully appreciating a critical aspect of why myth was so highly valued by past cultures. To set the stage for our examination of the possible natural history core of myth, we discuss briefly the history of the western scientific study of myth, with an emphasis on geological sciences. We then explore the cognitive structure of myth and provide working principles about how the historical information contained in these myths can be transmitted faithfully through successive generations and can be elicited by scientific study. Although recognizing the extreme complexity of myth as a cultural product, our data indicate that a science-based natural history approach can lead to important insights regarding the nature of myth.
Journal for The Theory of Social Behaviour, 2020
Myth has a convoluted etymological history in terms of its origins, meanings, and functions. Throughout this essay I explore the signification, structure, and essence of myth in terms of its source, force, form, object, and teleology derived from archaic ontology. Here I offer a theoretic typology of myth by engaging the work of contemporary scholar, Robert A. Segal, who places fine distinctions on criteria of explanation versus interpretation when theorizing about myth historically derived from methodologies employed in analytic philosophy and the philosophy of science. Through my analysis of an explanandum and an explanans, I argue that both interpretation and explanation are acts of explication that signify the ontological significance, truth, and psychic reality of myth in both individuals and social collectives. I conclude that, in essence, myth is a form of inner sense.
The Scientific Study of Myth: Romantic Account of Symbolism and Mythology
The present study seeks to investigate the arrangement of the science of mythology at the turn of the 19th century, and an understanding of the scientific work, which enabled to consider mythology a discipline. The research in a case of interpretation of the notions of myth and symbol explores prerequisites and framework for the study. The findings of the research illustrate the role of the disciplinary argument and publishing strategies in the debates surrounding mythology’s conceptual bases. The research demonstrates that at the turn of the 19th century mythology was established both as a subject of research and as a discipline in its own right on the crossroads of disciplinary arguments, knowledge differentiation and knowledge distribution strategies.
Myth as the Phenomenon of Culture.pdf
National Academy of Managerial Staff of Culture and Arts Herald, 2018
This paper aims at exploring myth as a phenomenon of culture. The authors have used anthropological integrative approach, semiotic method of representing myth as a language of culture, as well as phenomenological method. Myths provide meaning and purpose to all elements of culture. Myth underlies cultural reality – it is a core of culture. If we imagine culture as an onion comprised of different layers (the “onion” model of culture), than myth is the center of it – it is a core beyond articulation. It generates our beliefs and assumptions that are rarely explicated, however there beliefs and assumptions shape both the structure of personality and culture. They are taken for granted, but support any culture. They manifest themselves in an explicit form in values, purposes, goals, strategies, philosophies, which motivate us and shape our reality. Mythology is one of the ways to comprehend and interpret the world around us. Its basic concepts are the “world” and “human”. Through the lens of these concepts, people realized their destiny in the world and formed life attitudes during the early stages of human development. Giving place to philosophy and science, mythology has not lost its important place in human history. Mythological narratives were borrowed by many religions. In recent decades, representatives of literature and art have intentionally used myths to express their ideas. They have not only rethought ancient myths, but have created new mythological symbols. Nowadays, an interest in myths and mythologies has dramatically increased, and it is not by chance. The famous researchers of the primitive cultures and mythologies as the ways of mastering and interpreting the world have demonstrated the creative power and heuristic potential of myths that will be manifested in the future.
Does myth have to be old? Philosophical reflection on myth
Humaniora. Czasopismo Internetowe
The present paper is an introduction to the debate on the contemporary methodology of research on myths. I attempt herein to elucidate the essence of myth, with the attempt being carried out in two parts. In the first part, I overview a history of the philosophical debate on the subject as well as I specify the reasons why myth ought to be reunited with truth anew, as was the case with Greek philosophers. In the latter part, I deal with the analysis of myth in relation with a human being – both in the individualist senseand in the social one, with the latter sense performing a significant role in understanding the world as well as humanity at large. Furthermore, I suggest what the essence of myth might be and what validity it can have for the contemporary man. The reflection included in the present text is inspired by some pertinent philosophical conceptions that allow me to show that it is possible to say something new about myth and the research thereupon.