Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Barbour, Ian 1974 Symbol and Myth

    Uploaded by

    Karl Stirnerzon
    12 views9 pages

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    12 views9 pages

    Barbour, Ian 1974 Symbol and Myth

    Uploaded by

    Karl Stirnerzon

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 9
    2 Symbol and Myth IW THIS CHAPTER I wish briefly to consider religious modes in sclation to other forma of tligious language -pariclsly symbols images and myths. Four issues which will be signicre in the subsequent analysis of madels arise herein discustng these other Linguistic forms: (1) the role of analogy, (2) the relation of eligsons symbolism to human experience, (3) the diverse fancions of lipious language (especially evident in the case of mysh) and (4) the cognitive status of religious language. I will supgest that tne ‘ea ofrligs models oes ctintve way of dealing with ech 1. METAPHOR AND sy 434 Sybl amd Mych ab tis tiem while others are emphasized or distinctively organized. eis seen in a new way and new acttudes ae evoked. Thus the expression “Man isa wll invites ust consider human traits wich ‘nughe be analogous to famuliar wolEraits, We ate to construe man a8 wollllke, or in genera, ro ‘conrcrue oe situation in ers of another’. A metaphor can onder our perceptions, bringing forward aspects which we had not noticed before. One kind of experience i interpreted in terms of the characteristics of another! Ih a metaphor, a novel conigurtion has been produced by the exposition of me frame of reframe of wbich the reader must be Simltancously aware. I A Richards calls ta ransacton becween context Ie isa new creation for which chee are n0 rules and is meaning survives only at che intersection of the two perspectives ‘hich produced it.# One must maintain an awareness of both con- texts illuminating each other in unexpected ways. There is offen novelty and surprise in these new combinations and the fesh images that they evoke, They ante fom the concreteness and individuality of particular experiences, which only an extension of | Ionguage can try to convey ‘A metaphors ma Mera tre imagine romcone getting out the scales when his end says ‘My heat is heavy’, or asking for salt and pepper upon hearing ‘she has ben ina stew al day'.A metaphor is absurd interpete literally because the ewo contexts are widely lisparate; chre is a fagrant ering of what philosophers call “type-toundaris. Yet @ metaphor it nota usefl fiction, 2 mere pistence, a game of make-believe with no relation to realty; i ser that there are significant analogies berween the things coms pared. Literary erties have debated at length whether these resem- ‘lances can be reduced to 2 set of eunalet Hera expresiom. Some xis have suid thata meeaphor isa condensed simile ora substvute for detailed comparison; ty chim that a metaphor can be pars phrased exactly by a set of statements about the resemblance of specific features of the two situations. The metighor’s function ‘would then be decorative an thetoia,contibutng vividness nd 5 Myths, Models ond Paradis soy but no dine cogitive content, Ke would havea pycho- Ingal role but roe an inopensable logis ane = ‘The oppotng view, with which [would side, bots thaea meta] phor cannot be replaced by a tet of equivalent literal seatements ‘cate it i pened No init can be ae at ow the com pation might be extended; i cannot be paraphrased becnse had a unspecfable number of potentials fr artclation? The mpi is et for the reader explore eis not aniston fan ida already expicily spelled ont, but suggestive invication t0 the dnovery of farce sila. Fe wl Be propose inthe text chaper that scene models ate aot eliingble Bee they, too, ae based on acloges wich ae operoded an extensible though of course they are more systematically developed than rmetapors : Unlike scenic mes, however, metaphors ~ especially in poetry —clten have nil nd alain on The cl eth felings and ances. Metphocs are dynamics language becomes event The reader is involved a2» persbl particpnt and couraged to draw Gon various dimensions of his own experience. Metaphor is expresve ofthe poets experience and evocative of the reader's But the presence of these noneogitve farctons does not require hat cognitive futons be absent Metaphor inorce ‘rption end incrpreaton 28 Wel 5c. A poem, aceoring t> Philp Wheelurigh, ‘sys something, however tetatively and cbliguelyy abou the nature of hati Even though i akc nly ‘ashy ontological claim’, et not jst emotional fe snakes» “ight assertion? whichis efeenial even when tis oly suggestive. Kis judged by is ihfolness to concrete human experience * Now many religious symbols sem tbe metaphors bated on analogies within man's experience. Consider Sese the rymdls of hugh: Movement upwacds is physicly more dice chan downe ‘wad, so higher? becomes a symbol of achievement and excellence hin of che imagery of ace, om Plato to Dante to Thomas Merton). Height alo soeated with the recgrion of ower, as when men kneel or bow dow bef the elevated throne of 3 king in acknowledging his rule ‘ove? ther. Edy Bevan shows, 4 Spoe end hee ine opera minster ene so ern er Es ec nag eon icc ri mgr out, Heese nen Co tema i tay meme peioe rel a bem ey oe egret cerenangiae Rapae ree cor ont rm le prin gir ore: loon Me 5 sinner Myths, Models and Peratigns be en irl hey combie temo an etn ad teeth ain acpi i ‘tous unless oe i suger ovninaiuaet Tn che ial tation, muy of fe Coie etapa dawn fn penal gency, Wich nope ae Pose, will, action and ae , oc. Sane pre asggesc need seq rain Thetl my Sees? Oco Invoked mare sen and devbped nore earthy, Se hat shall clad rita‘ int Pater oe lee Metplocs se empty enly memcratly et root lite ge feet, br sae ly a sere ap ier ier cemuia aanyeorenes Weer eh Inthe bie canto conerr te wal ooh oe mee ters Toe and pure. Orr wigan Sooner Sed Amine models shire impel chao Instr capers we wl fd hv lions pe Seay recipies, afr inde on iar abo is oe tng te mel They tre a ng” wh Pe tpl seca rcrcung wel re ing or cxpo Madi, We etpry nay lp ww foes Farce Eee ofthe wo nl ef hn fone” the scsi sce, the puns of avo, Ge inerpcatin oe Coen and he iain ef peeps -a weer dy tomer whereas rad ted neu aed ronan fbn tn Bo cc, howe, can re we oat eT no snpy tut banana e 2. PARABLE AND ANALOGY ‘A narrative form of analogy fequenty (ound in religious teachings is thegarat 2 shot fetional sory whace characters are taken fom everyday if nan allegory every person or part represents some- ‘hing ele with a 1-0-1 correspondences ina parable, however, the seory as 2 whole conveys the comparison (fr example, “The King dom of God is like unto a man who. «2. wll eonine myst co thre obverations: 6 Syd end Me 1. ab cl fr din, They topgest mites ad pics and provoke the heres response. His udgret ical fry he must acept or ree. Ocaaly tit sexs pte cu King Doi acknowedges Ua poor man in Nath pac fas teenunjoty ete and then sts thatthe mpieescoeri Sion of hele More often the eae simpli invited to see ims in a parable; he dawn in pactspant and acto. Peter ‘Sher hr weit: “The alge ero in pot amo sy seg, They ae three pw peat poles fe Ing sd eon Tat ‘Eipe, The cn sep cot hc ge ie od rn, toch tn tony fn trac pteny lve, They ae dh ‘igs impan eee eer ge id pe ad tbotbeyiing hense tag SO? Some pails, sch 8 the Pacibe ofthe God Samaria, are ‘indeed wel ction whose aly pots revemen sical, folic fr ving, ‘er and sole Other prs seem athe se {ie to make cis sbou eat he Paral fee Pedal Son commends vow sll stanc, but ila npn God kes fhe. 2: Pee a opevended CH, Dod gives this definate et the parle na metphor or nie drawn fom ature ot conn ie avetag the bearer by its vivdoes or seangenc Sd lewving the nin in sce dot abou peste ap Soo te tense actec thought Like a econ 2 pale Presets companion to be eplorad, insights to be diame focan ocna astuton of tac of capi sated preps (os scolar elive tt theepanatiny legis and os Tory appeal which low several Jos partes nthe goes sr tr abl othe pbs hema! Oe prin ae many ected and an be api too sown aso under ware of ciurtances afer ne has tral © unleta the niga context in whi they Were ok 3. Parables omontrdimager, Who in fget te Pa So, the God Smet, once he as han abou eben? Merc images se more important than abstract cones 2 shes Se Myth, Mose an Peat the transmission of religious tradition, Tages infuence attitudes and behaviour more powerflly chan general principles do. They ae ‘common inthe experience of worship (a, fr example, in the expe imagery of Isah’s vision). Perhaps both philosophers and theo: logians, in concentrating. on verbaly-stated propositions, have tended 10 neplect the role of images in human thoughr.48 ‘Austin Farrer maineains the rigs mage are cence ithe biblical tradition. He holds chat Gad has revealed himself though “inspced images’ rather than through croeds or doctrines. There © images, he urges, are based on analogics which man neither postu lates nor establishes for himself, bu simply accepts because they ae “God-given. Once revealed, chey can be used to interpret experi fence and historical evenes. Farrer discusses a. number of these biblical images in decail and makes a convincing case or their influence 18 ‘The idea of ely rele image? escapes the liteaima of sicectly revealed propoivons, yet several obyetions can be raised By his appeal to authority, Facer makes ‘authorized images ‘immune (0 criticism. Surely che images of diferent religious tra ‘ions led to iocompacible afmatios, On what bass should one accept the claim that the images of a parcicular tadtion are revealed? Further, can we not acknowledge the importance of imagination without treating it 28 a separate faculry which God ‘ould use in isolation from other ficulties? To be sue, Farrer does give the religious community 2a active oe in the development and Interpretation of images, and even in their origination ran is not ‘ensirelypastve. But by detaching religous images fom the huran enperience in which they occur, he minimizes the influence of psychological forces and culturalimagesom literature, mythology, are ete). T would agree that in the biblical eadition events are interpreted through dominant images, but submit that the images themselves ate not directly God-given but arise Grom man’s ana logical imagination, “The role of analogy which T wll develop differs, however, from ‘he sradtionaldocrin of analogy, How can religious language avoid litera on the one hand and emptiness on the other? IF familiar 8 Sym and My tems ae pei of Gr! ery (ie), enn Snihopororphsm. But if no familiar terms can te prediaed, ‘xcept equivocaly, one ends in agnosticism. (W divine love in no way resembles hufan love the term is vacuous one could aswell [UT ane han, or divine obese, ster dcaoning al rniae enotatansof the tems) The doctrine of analogy was supposed co provise t mle ways allowing fr Boch amity and diernce fecween God and man * But one of ts two cassia forms, the ang of proportionality, scent enclose agnostic. For ie deniet that there fe any tnalogy between divine nd human godnes themselves, aseres anly cha divine goodness is o Go's ature as buman poodnes i tomas naure—inother words that eachis good na way appropri ate its own ratte Bu unless we have sme prior krowtedge of Gas nature, or assume an ontology olevel a being” with ore contiuiy berween the level, the proportionality’ tells us nothing aout Gd. Th other eal orm the nog of erbation sates tbat a charctertic can be predicated rrally” of God and “desvativel of crested Koga: But the argument rests on the assumptions that estes resemble their effects and that Go the cause of the woed, The eonelusion then aserts only what Sas alread inthe premis: the erestoy i good in whatever way neces sary Co produce gone in the ereccres. analogies ae bas on religions experienc, however, neither of these fvo assures need be made. The oe of analogy in religous models wil be pre. ented in literchapeer. 5. THE CHARACTER OF MYTH. Religions symbols and jmages are combines in the ceenplex narra ‘ves known as‘imyths. These forms have been ilirinated. by hiseorizns studying, ancient civilizations and by anchropelogsts studying prelrerate cultures today. In corso literary crits, ‘who have wsuilly concentrated on the ineroal content of myths, historians and anthropologists have been concerned about thet" place in the lives of individuals and groups In broad terms, a myth 9 Meh, Mod and Pras J issn wh an oma me ate fhe ke Wel forte nomen popone te quston ofthe caravan sat savated the yh oir eves std ener eaten Ott in ma Mabey le hangs Sgalantnpenoal sn corporte es end preg oterdeing expec and ating in aly, abnp te low tes 1 Myth of wey of rding experience. Myr provide a workd- view, a vision o the basic tuctoe of reality. Riot mye are set atthe time of ewason, orn a prinordl ine ost he tne hey historical events ~ sins in which the rms of existence were established, modified or dicosed. Te presente inerpeted inthe Tighcof the formative events narrated i the ch 25 Brera Eade has shown. Deter Berger ieee this ordering of experience at ‘nomizing’or ‘coming the adoption of deamstoed comic framework fr human lie. According (9 Steng, mychs show ‘he cssenialsructae of realy, mas in parla events ofthe Drs that are remembered fm gencra8000 germation myth felevant to daly Lie because ie deals Wich premial problems and the endaringorder the word in which man ves 1 Myf men en at. He ake is el engin par frente pst events which he believes ive ade him what be He undscstands himself in lation che ancestors of his people. ‘communiy is contuted by the key ets whch it members ane in which its members participate. A ving myth evokes per. sonal involvement rather than concemplation o conceptual analy sis. Init a way ofacon which brings man nt acord with group an an ordained order. It expresses ‘the continuity between the struc» fuser of human existence and cormic sic (Elade). Ceeston myths usually mast in dramace frm Bi convictions about trum nature and destiny. 3. Myths exon a teving poser in baner lif. The cosmic order reflected in myths typi hav arp stewie Thee an dal tate or bing which presents he ire, gd and goal of life. The actual condition of man is sepsraed from the ideal by some haw, dec or distortion, variously wieozd at sin, jgparanee » Syl and Myth steichment, ete. But @ seing fer can overcome the Baw and escablish the idea; i may take the form ofa personal redeemee a Jaw, ritual or discipline to be followed. Myche thus portray and convey a power to sansform man's fe rather than a predominantly theoretical explanation of “4 Myth provide parm for buman action. They bold up not an abstract ideal but a prototype for mans imitation. Often the actions of divine beings or mythical ancestors give the exemplary patterns for ritual, moral and pracucal behaviour. “Hence the supceme anetion ofthe myth io “x the paradigmatic models fra tes and al significant activiees ~ eating, sextality, work, ecucator, 00718 Myths ae vivid and impressive inepcing thee adherents ‘motional response and concrete ation. They encourage parte! firms of behaviour and implicitly embody idea! goas ad judge rents of value. Myths form and sanction the oral soem of 8 sce 5. My ar enacted in rush. Myths are expresed ot only in symbolic words, but also in symbolic acts ~ dance, gesture, dara, ane formalized cutie aes or rites. Myths are narated and enacted in ital, The myth often justies the ritual, while che rus! erase rts the myth and provides a way of taking par in it, 35 van det Leeuw shows.? The orginal event becomes preset (re peesented) in symbolic re-enactment. Culie ats embody the ercative power of primordial and historical time and create new the firms for otdee- ing experince and scion, “There are many examples of this cose association of myth and ‘tual. New Year's festivals in several culeures are known to have included the rsitton and gcrment of creation myths. Lx ancient ‘Mesopotamia, the victory of Marduk over Tiamat, the preva! Aragon, was acted oct ancwally; the New Yes a8 anew begining, wat celebrated asa renewal ofthe primordial victory of order over chaos. There was 2 close corelation of myth and cial also ia the ‘rnystery religions of the Near East, such 2s Orphiy Elewsinan and Isis cults, The leer was a ritual dramatization of che Isi-Onrss myth of death and resurrection, through which the initiate soughe immmortalicy. Again, the ‘rites of passage? critical points in indivi- Myths, Mode and Paradigms dial it, making 2 change of aus (hit, pubery, mage, dat) aie alawstalvaysacompancd by the peenaion ste inion ereonies and ter puacton andra o nya palm Some attceglogits have in ft mintsned cha tee the cate fom nal elo ena tat yh wdetcepd Inter to justi and empl i. aset hols he en dase ut bef they thoughout hi response. Changes in roe tod ination sien seat tlre chings inca Thus Hing Reg, and others claim that mych arnes omit even occ themyth may be rementirel long ter he ie wher sector has dapat: Oc rope hts lye Rash reply that thee ae some myths (moog. Alien Pygmy and ‘Aneiin Inds es fe cample) heh have evs eter, teen erated in ceremonial farm. They ise ha the tate beeen myth andl camper ad ec, conte acd to any simple universal pater except by ssc te of tvidene. ln some ewes th infers ain other ec eal induces myth, alter they develop togecer espe “according to prt ees ae hasta Gruman, Both mph and esl ae guns frm of rion, A ‘altar cammisis have elt hele ging ond eave fxs inv work scnng inthe wonder enced ithe sein 2 joing in Ena of thancping or harves in he Zara The esas and oly dyson wee pis Ceebracons of the Korea eats ach it emerald and ‘yuiecaly reanacrd. The gy, sal and saconers of 2 Gstian emmariy fave, ofc, ee ow fa meaty Cf the lieu Chee nl chee ntact, ma ie nthe pee inerprecedareaton tothe comicordt ported in ores dnt the use army sdeied story ia whic some pet fhe commie xd i marie, then the tro acy Chis aed an mast bes incade myths. Fo in hem one ds sos Gots etn, judgment deliverance, iearation, and oth aod tee sos oer way of onderng experince and pater Symbal and My Fe rte Ihaman rationality, and utopia chro rainiy concerned however, with tre 4 THE FUNCTIONS OF MYTH We must nov examin the freon and copaie sara cfgehe Indes eto mele Guster spl fico fry rte lod Inthe Ber of he sets of ne Tbawrel oaer and dent psa earns eran fon ol anny They et meca of gy deze vere of ecto furan well and 3 ay oF Bune oppor ih nace ad oe Ter ieuey snd spb ovine Tate ieecasen, thy lied ear, re ier sontet worsens wih. Aco 0 Fea Gans epoentng rps ead snp. res find dnguted sonal abo sod fees ginal dearer bce of Be Symp “The nl fac of my have been soe by ot seve sine Durthein, Mis promot the wero of ce They aver ce Woding scommniy oer wo co tng to sal warty, pup Went sod tomer! Ba Foy. Ty cncarge url aby fray an cae ee Thich i carly teed o amore evry spec of cae a ys, Mes ond Paraigns (Malinowsk). Myth sanction the existing scl order and juris its status sytem and power sroctare, providing a atone for social and pelea! intctions ~ fom Kishi kingship. A common morality i supported by 3 mythic wadion, which perpetuates both valueaeticudes tnd specie behavioural recom rendstions. ‘An interesting intepetation known 23 inaction bas been expounded by Claude LéviSicauss. He finds a birary seoctre in aay mythe wich opposing eerms. These myths have an interral logicl pater in which the iil epposition i overcome often by the introduction of 3 thd term. Bit the formal properties of tie inyth, especially the logic of contradictions and crac ave paalkls in the suture of society. The binary oppsions in Eeciety are made toeable by the may ths the ci category helps ro rnediate between the overly izeconclabe aspects ofthe soi trder. Thus Le-Strnise tiesto display the Engustic and logical Features ofthe recurrent patterns within various myths, and «se: fore hee fnction in coping wih confit in individual od sei lies "Now these analyses f varius paychologcl and soil fanctions do rotin themselves sy anything abouc te cgi ste of Tobe sur, any oe ofthese analyses i taken 8 a al-embracing, theory concerning the orgie of myth it becomes a reductionist explanation. (This occurs if one says that myth i nothing but 2 Prijecton of sexta repretin, or nothing but a ratinalization of Feual ore symbolic representation of sca sructres) Burt would be quite content to defnd a vainy of fncions of myth in individual ad socal if, while leaving ro one side the quston of truth ox ls To theistunentlt, however a myeh iin pri- dpe either tre nor ike, but a wef itm. Thus Alasdair Mac- Iniyre writes | ac myeh in ivng or ded, oot ere or fle, You cannot refite 3 myth ‘pcruat 2s moe 20 Yu tac ae real, you do noe resi a5 a myth at ea hypothesis or hstory. Myths which oil nceasy coexist they were Fypothees or histo, fer example val aconnes eatin, comfor- ally belong tothe same bady of cology 4 ed Spnbl end Myth Bar surely che pralem of the cognitive srs of mys cane be so easly dsmised. For ane thing, te ble yen of el tradition are caken mote serously by thei adherents than Jas mentale secounts acknowledge. Cosmological bef ape 2 central Feature ofmych, a Blade has indicated. De Waal Malic ranean thie myth and etual are intimately assented, pe because eicher is derived rom the ether, bu beeause both ate based on partic belies ab he cosmic order A rial presupposes a world-view, a aet of sumptions within which the ritual makes sense. Heney ‘Muray deserbes ‘cognitive and canvictional Fanctns! of myths, which must be credible to their adherents, ehouh he ennsiders these secondary (9 other funtions 3 Even chewgh a living myth s Close eo daily ethan co metaphysical speculation, ie dressers ro presuppose some sort af euth-daims which can be examined. What cognitive status, then, can be asigned to myth? In che G nineteenth century, mythology was usually viewed as 2 pom irom 1 eplain nara! ghowmens. One enuld point co etoogical Stories accounting fr che exigins of striking features of the world and then conclude that myths are essentially presceniic ater Toanswer scientific questions As such, they have cbviauly been Superseded by modern scence. Influenced by the prevailing faith in tnan'sprogressand the eveltionofeulure, these auchors dismissed myths che product ofthe prelogia! mind during ‘the childhood of | the race. Even mat Casicer-who defends myth 2s. auronomous fom iseducible to psychological or soil forces, and holds chat rmychs ar based on an autheneic intuition of the solidity and cen- tinaity of coum life ~ ends by assercing thar the age of mythical consciousness been superseded by the scientific ag ‘Bat ifmyths are noe true when caken Literally, whacking of ruth can they be said to have? One possbilicy woud be to take chem as ‘mba of man's mer fe. They would be valid in 9 far as they authentically expressed mans feelings, hopes and Fears, hisexpet~ fences of guilt reconciliation and liberation fom anaery. Cal Jung oes further chan this: for him, myths are the projection of inser psychic dramas, but these in tara are products of the ‘cllecive ‘boconscious’. Common tothe mythologies ofthe ancient work! and as Mtn, Mode aad Pealignt the dreams of modern man, he says, are archetypal figures, pric ‘nord images, univecsal spcbols, known by a kindof immediate initive awareness. Even myths about the elements of nature (un aed moon, simmer and winter, ete) are symbolic expeessions of man’s unconscious psychic fe in which the ezeral archetypes ate ‘eveountered ‘The aost noble recent efor to translate biblical myth in terms of mas iner les Rudolf Baltmann’s programme ol donyrhlegi2- ‘ng. He objects to myth because it testo represen the divine in the objective categories ofthe physial wore! In the New Testa ment these misleading categories include space (eg, Chist 23 “coming down! and ‘icending’) time (eschatology as temporal Salty), and causality (mires and supernarra) forces) ‘These first-century thoughtforms mast be rejected, according to Bul smann, both because they are scientscally untenable in a work at lawl causeandefet and because they are thevbgielly inade gute: the transcendent cannot be represented in the exexorie of the objective world, Moreover, e insists the (rue meaning of Sexiptural myth always did involve man's sltundertanding The sospel was concerned about man’s hopes, firs, decisions and «ommitmnents in the present, net shout miraculous occurrences in the pase For Boltmann, ‘demythologizng” is ccomplished by eel reinterpretation. Ai sligious formulations must be statements of new undersanding of ourselves. We must ask what a given mae saysabout new modes ofpersoral existence, new pessbiites for eur lives. Bulunann draws ftom che exegores of Heidesges’s phi. sophy: man's anxery, fileaness and guile, and the transition to suthenscey, feedom and openness to the ftute. Chist way the ‘an of radical feedom ~ fcedom fram ankety, freedom to love = sand be opens for us che possiblity of authentic existence. Fath i ‘ot the aeeeptance of propositions about the post but response,

    You might also like