Dear Class and Craig,
So, I was having a discussion with my family in NYC about myths and about rigidification into ideologies. I think Craig had said that myths were not taken literally at first but that then would sometimes become rigid ideologies. I brought this up in discussion with my family and we had a lively discussion in which this assumption was brought into question. What proof do we have that myths were not taken as fact initially? Did the Greeks not take the stories of their gods and actions literally? How do we know whether these were or were not taken literally? If we think about the stories we were told as children, we may have taken them as truth and eventually grown up to understand them as myths. However, we see in our North American society a lot of adults who take the word of the bible literally. Have these believers simply not grown up? Do they actually believe in the literal interpretation of the bible? Can we not assume that ancient Greek adults were the same in their beliefs?
Thanks for your feedback.
Douglas
Replies
In many traditions--West African, for instance--tribal storytellers begin with a joke about not taking their tales literally true. If you ask a Navajo or Zuni whether a literal Thunderbird hides behind storm clouds they will just laugh. Taking tales literally is a Western and, especially, American prejudice.
Christianity itself began as a variety of spiritual "schools," some of which (Gnostic) took the Resurrection and other parts of the story as wisdom truths. It was only one group of "straight thinkers" who decided their version was historically right and true and all others were heresies. This group became what we know as the Christian Church of its day.
Thanks for this clarification. And to Vicky Jo for her reading recommendation. I have been super busy at the climate events in NYC and wondering when I will have time to write my proposal. I wrote a couple of pages on the plane, but not that wonderful. Anyway, I've been seeing things through archetypal and mythical eyes these days. Yesterday I started the day with a native American ritual circle in Central Park and ended the day at an interfaith ceremony at St. john the Divine Cathedral. The day was thick with meaning, intention, and emotion. It continues today.
Hi Douglas,
This is not an answer per se, but an offer of a resource -- a book!
One reviewer says of the book:
"Behind the seemingly narrow and specialised title “Did Greeks believe in their myths?” really hides a philosophical essay on the nature of our world-view. What is truth, and is it possible that there’re many “truths”, not just one? Did the concept of truth in modern sense exist in ancient times? When did modern history begin and what’re its methods? What is myth, and isn’t our science (Einstein, Freud, etc.) also based on its own myth? What is the sociology of truth, and its social distribution? What is faith, and its relation to power? How should we read ancient cosmogonies? Is myth a way of thinking, or a kind of knowledge, or something else? When did the notion of “historical time” appear, and are other concepts of time possible?
All these questions are brilliantly addressed in this little book, and are masterfully answered. Buy this book and read it attentively: it’s worth your time!:)"
_________________
The book title is "Did the Greeks Believe in Their Myths?: An Essay on the Constitutive Imagination Paperback" – by Paul Veyne
Amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/Did-Greeks-Believe-Their-Myths/dp/0226854345/...
There are other reviews that give some insight into the content -- it appears to address the very question you are posing.
I expect the point that I'm trying to make, in a horribly roundabout way, is that it's a complicated matter, just as your query indicates.
I hope this response is helpful and not just frustrating.
-Vicky Jo :-)
Thanks, Vicky Jo!
Fascinating discussion. I was just thinking that truth can be thought of as an archetype.