From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sun Apr 13 2003 - 19:23:06 BST
Rick, Sam and all:
> RICK
> If you are putting your theological beliefs in with the myths and poems
that
> Campbell is talking about then I have no quarrel with you. That's exactly
> how I see religion, as mythology; As metaphorical stories that a culture
> makes up about itself for its own good. Perhaps in the same way Pirsig
> talks of science inventing a myth of independence from the social world
for
> its own good, religion has invented a myth of compatibility with science
for
> its own benefit.
I think I'm closer to DMB on this, than to you. I (i) don't think it's
possible to think without an underlying mythology (meta-narrative, final
vocabulary, whatever) (ii) think that science operates within a mythology
which is largely unacknowledged (iii) think that the Christian mythology,
for all its faults, is superior to the scientific one (more precisely, it is
superior to Modernism). I think DMB would agree with me on (i), (ii) and
part of (iii), but I'd be interested to know for sure. I'd also be
interested to know what are the myths which he (and you) live by.
DMB says:
Hmmm. (i)I'm not so sure that meta-narratives and final vocabularies are the
same thing as mythology, but I'd certainly agree that its the social level
that allows us to think. This makes sense because language, mythology,
ritual and things like that are sort of like pre-requisites for thought.
(ii) I don't think its helpful to say "science operates within a mythology".
The "myth" of independence that Pirsig talks about is a myth only in the
conventional sense, meaning a commonly held misconception. Its true that we
all operate on the basis of mythology whether we acknowledge it or not, but
there is no reason to single out scientists or science. Since we can same
the same thing about every person, putting this soley in their laps seems
arbitrary. And if you are using "myth" to mean presumptions and assumptions,
the charge is still arbitrary. (iii) I think its a huge mistake to treat
science and Christianity and two rival mythologies. To then simply declare
that one is superior without even hinting at why we should believe it, well,
that's just not an argument or a case or anything. I have to say it looks
like pride is at work here, and that this is not an unbiased analysis.
What are the myths by which we live? Myths that have been invented? Gents, I
think you both imply that we can exercise conscious control over myths, but
it just ain't so. They are generated in the unconscious very much like a
dream and so one hardly has any choice about such things. The best we can
hope for is to have enough insight into our own inner lives and to DISCOVER
which myths animate our lives. As I understand it, these things shift over
time. We worship different gods at different stages of our lives, so to
speak. Or we may return to the same myths over and over, but each time the
approach is at higher and deeper levels of meaning, like an upward spiral.
We can get trapped in them too.
To answer more directly... I'm not sure, but I think Orpheus has a hold of
me. Don't know what that means, exactly. I just know he rocks my world.
Don't look back,
dmb
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Apr 13 2003 - 19:23:04 BST