How do you understand the word "myth"?

[Aubrey]

Please vote & elaborate if you'd like.

[Daisy]

I voted the first one.

 

Imo, a myth is simply a collection of stories (real or fiction) that a culture uses to explain their origins, beliefs, etc.

[Hunter's Moon]

I voted the first one.

 

Imo, a myth is simply a collection of stories (real or fiction) that a culture uses to explain their origins, beliefs, etc.

:iagree:

[IsabelC]

Both of the above definitions, plus

3. A commonly held but untrue belief, eg "it is a myth that large numbers of mothers physically cannot breastfeed".

The applicable definition will depend on the context in which it is found.

[Spy Car]

A traditional story, typically involving supernatural beings or forces, which embodies and provides an explanation, aetiology [provides causation], or justification for something such as the early history of a society, a religious belief or ritual, or a natural phenomenon.

 

Bill

[Spy Car]

Both of the above definitions, plus

3. A commonly held but untrue belief, eg "it is a myth that large numbers of mothers physically cannot breastfeed".

The applicable definition will depend on the context in which it is found.

 

Vulgarism.

 

Bill

[Karen in CO]

btw - Mythos by Joseph Campbell is available on Netflix OnDemand. I was watching it today on the treadmill.

[Audrey]

Please vote & elaborate if you'd like.

 

 

I put "both." Just because a myth is fiction doesn't mean it can't also be of great significance to a culture. ;)

[Dawn in OH]

Both of the above definitions, plus

3. A commonly held but untrue belief, eg "it is a myth that large numbers of mothers physically cannot breastfeed".

The applicable definition will depend on the context in which it is found.

 

:iagree:

[Aubrey]

I read an interesting link the other day that said that when the link to religion is broken, a myth gets declassified to a folk tale.

 

Anyway, the point of all this--dh had never heard the 1st definition, & we've been arguing about it for a week, lol. Ils had the kids this weekend, so there was extra time for extended theoretical arguments. (Unfortunately, all the ones that occurred in public involved illegal activity, which, if overheard, might not have mattered much that it was HYPOTHETICAL.)

 

As I was saying. He argued that since Def #1 of myth did not come up in his history degree & since he is well-read, it can be assumed that most people don't know Def #1 & will therefore likely be offended by such use, since they'll assume Def #2. He thinks only scholars know Def #1 & therefore, since no one cares about them, common usage dictates that only Def #2 should be used *now.* He pointed out the organic, fluxuating nature of language in his defense.

 

I argued, otoh, that since very few people other than scholars care to discuss the academic qualities of myths, Def #1 should stand, because if he didn't care about the 9 scholars, then I didn't care about the 3 people who BOTH wanted to talk about myths AND didn't know Def #1. Then I stuck my tongue out. Hehehehe.

 

After an hour, we came to an agreement: I would pick a new word for Def #1 & frindle it on my blog. We were both *quite* happy w/ this, & when I pointed out that we *do* sometimes agree about things, he laughed & said only when we bend the laws of standard English & gravity.

 

(Because last weekend we were arguing about whether or not the earth could be flat. I've told y'all that we nearly called off the wedding when we couldn't agree on a working definition of Truth, yes?)

[Spy Car]

I read an interesting link the other day that said that when the link to religion is broken, a myth gets declassified to a folk tale.

 

Anyway, the point of all this--dh had never heard the 1st definition, & we've been arguing about it for a week, lol. Ils had the kids this weekend, so there was extra time for extended theoretical arguments. (Unfortunately, all the ones that occurred in public involved illegal activity, which, if overheard, might not have mattered much that it was HYPOTHETICAL.)

 

As I was saying. He argued that since Def #1 of myth did not come up in his history degree & since he is well-read, it can be assumed that most people don't know Def #1 & will therefore likely be offended by such use, since they'll assume Def #2. He thinks only scholars know Def #1 & therefore, since no one cares about them, common usage dictates that only Def #2 should be used *now.* He pointed out the organic, fluxuating nature of language in his defense.

 

I argued, otoh, that since very few people other than scholars care to discuss the academic qualities of myths, Def #1 should stand, because if he didn't care about the 9 scholars, then I didn't care about the 3 people who BOTH wanted to talk about myths AND didn't know Def #1. Then I stuck my tongue out. Hehehehe.

 

After an hour, we came to an agreement: I would pick a new word for Def #1 & frindle it on my blog. We were both *quite* happy w/ this, & when I pointed out that we *do* sometimes agree about things, he laughed & said only when we bend the laws of standard English & gravity.

 

(Because last weekend we were arguing about whether or not the earth could be flat. I've told y'all that we nearly called off the wedding when we couldn't agree on a working definition of Truth, yes?)

 

Conceding the use of the term myth (mythos) as a synonym of "falsehood" is giving up a fine and important term (that is important to Classical Education) to the ignorance of the barbarians. Hold the line. Take no prisoners.

 

Just because 90% (or more) of the people are numbskulls does not mean you have to be one.

 

Bill (traditionalist)

[Aubrey]

Conceding the use of the term myth (mythos) as a synonym of "falsehood" is giving up a fine and important term (that is important to Classical Education) to the ignorance of the barbarians. Hold the line. Take no prisoners.

 

Just because 90% (or more) of the people are numbskulls does not mean you have to be one.

 

Bill (traditionalist)

 

Well, see, I hadn't heard the term until taking a Catholic religion class as a jr in college, so I remember the awful outrage I felt for the numbskull teaching the class. (He really was.)

 

But, otoh, I don't think words are as simple as mere interchangeable numbers. Yes, there are synonyms, but they don't *mean* the same thing. Thus terms like "hamartia" & "in medias res."

 

Again, though, dh is quite annoyed by the "pretentious" (his words, not mine) use of foreign words where English ones would do fine. I've tried to explain to him that there's nuance & history & flavor that makes "hubris" a better choice sometimes, for ex. (I mean, come on, we *need* that word, if not the other ones--how else is a body going to summon a reader's experience of Achilleus & Oedipus in one fell swoop?)

 

He only agreed with me once, though--when I suggested "Byrthnot" as a middle name for our oldest. :glare: :lol:

[Spy Car]

Well, see, I hadn't heard the term until taking a Catholic religion class as a jr in college, so I remember the awful outrage I felt for the numbskull teaching the class. (He really was.)

 

But, otoh, I don't think words are as simple as mere interchangeable numbers. Yes, there are synonyms, but they don't *mean* the same thing. Thus terms like "hamartia" & "in medias res."

 

Again, though, dh is quite annoyed by the "pretentious" (his words, not mine) use of foreign words where English ones would do fine. I've tried to explain to him that there's nuance & history & flavor that makes "hubris" a better choice sometimes, for ex. (I mean, come on, we *need* that word, if not the other ones--how else is a body going to summon a reader's experience of Achilleus & Oedipus in one fell swoop?)

 

He only agreed with me once, though--when I suggested "Byrthnot" as a middle name for our oldest. :glare: :lol:

 

Mythos (myth) carries a deep layer of meaning. It has throughout our history in the West. "Sacred stories" just doesn't quite cut it.

 

We have many ways in our language to say something is untrue or a falsehood. Saying it is a "myth" ought not be one of them, as it is a vulgarized corruption of the classical usage by the barbarians. Don't they teach Greek in the seminary? :D

 

Mutter, mutter.

 

Bill

[Melissa in Australia]

To me a myth is both A story of primary significance to a culture, and Ancient fiction. but with roots in a real event, which has been distorted and exaggerated over time.

so I voted other.

[Aubrey]

I suspect that the idea that myths = fiction comes from the way "mythology" is introduced in elementary school: an easy, accessible way to approach ancient cultures. And then, of course, modern mythology is a lot touchier, & schools try not to address "religious" issues. Thus, by avoiding teaching religion in the classroom, there has been a subtle, unintended message that myths are ancient fictions. *We* don't have myths, this assumption would continue.

 

And after a couple of generations of that, correcting it would be pretty near impossible. If you tried, parents would be up in arms. So I'm thinking it's an uncorrectable, vicious cycle. :001_huh:

[Spy Car]

Both are wrong.

[Aubrey]

Both are wrong.

 

Both what?

[Aubrey]

Mythos (myth) carries a deep layer of meaning. It has throughout our history in the West. "Sacred stories" just doesn't quite cut it.

 

We have many ways in our language to say something is untrue or a falsehood. Saying it is a "myth" ought not be one of them, as it is a vulgarized corruption of the classical usage by the barbarians. Don't they teach Greek in the seminary? :D

 

Mutter, mutter.

 

Bill

 

Oooh, I hadn't thought about *not* using myth to mean fiction. Fwiw, he has conceded the argument.

 

As far as the Greek in the seminary--well, I don't think the word myth came up. He only had a couple of semesters, but...there's a distinctly different flavor to teaching Biblical Greek vs classical. There's very little history, flavor, etc. allowed in the understanding or interpretation of a word.

 

Imo, that's a tragedy, but knowing neither kind of Greek, my opinion holds little weight. Still, I think that when the Gospel writers said that Jesus had come "to take away the hamartia of the world," the Greeks would surely have thought of Oedipus & the meaning, the deep & painful meaning *to them* of that word. I can't help thinking that John *intended* them to think of all those things, & to look at Jesus w/ consequent awe.

 

So I think making the hard & fast distinction between the two kinds of Greek is just shooting ourselves in the foot, but like I said, they tell me I don't know what I'm talking about. (The Greek scholars; not dh--he knows better. Hehehe.)

[Spy Car]

I suspect that the idea that myths = fiction comes from the way "mythology" is introduced in elementary school: an easy, accessible way to approach ancient cultures. And then, of course, modern mythology is a lot touchier, & schools try not to address "religious" issues. Thus, by avoiding teaching religion in the classroom, there has been a subtle, unintended message that myths are ancient fictions. *We* don't have myths, this assumption would continue.

 

And after a couple of generations of that, correcting it would be pretty near impossible. If you tried, parents would be up in arms. So I'm thinking it's an uncorrectable, vicious cycle. :001_huh:

 

But you are using "fiction" as a synonym for "falsehood."

 

Myth is neither. It is a scared tale that explains the origin of things. Genesis is a Judeo-Christian myth. The term "myth" gives no value judgements to the truth or falsity of the tales as "history" it merely acknowledges the high importance placed on these tales by the cultures that believe them. To be called a "myth" elevates a sacred story to a position of high cultural honor.

 

Bill

[Spy Car]

Both what?

 

Both options in the poll. Both are incorrect usage. Option 1 is closer, but not good enough.

 

Bill

[Aubrey]

But you are using "fiction" as a synonym for "falsehood."

 

I didn't mean to--I meant "fiction" in the library sense: made-up, but not a lie.

 

Myth is neither. It is a scared tale that explains the origin of things. Genesis is a Judeo-Christian myth. The term "myth" gives no value judgements to the truth or falsity of the tales as "history" it merely acknowledges the high importance placed on these tales by the cultures that believe them. To be called a "myth" elevates a sacred story to a position of high cultural honor.

 

Bill

 

Right. I'm just saying that's not how elem school teachers deal w/ "myth," & in oversimplifying the idea, they may have inadvertently created a new meaning for the word. I was just thinking about how the meaning might have originally split.

[Aubrey]

Both options in the poll. Both are incorrect usage. Option 1 is closer, but not good enough.

 

Bill

 

Oh, ok. I just took it from another website. I was having a hard time putting it into words, & I know how these polls can be. Some people get really picky about terminology. :lol:

[Spy Car]

.... but like I said, they tell me I don't know what I'm talking about.

 

Tell these knuckleheads that you belong to a community that actually cares about Classical Education (so much so that they capitalized it :D) and that you are not about to suffer fools gladly when it comes to vandalizing the pillars of our culture. :tongue_smilie:

 

Bill

[Spy Car]

Oh, ok. I just took it from another website. I was having a hard time putting it into words, & I know how these polls can be. Some people get really picky about terminology. :lol:

 

 

A traditional story, typically involving supernatural beings or forces, which embodies and provides an explanation, aetiology [provides causation], or justification for something such as the early history of a society, a religious belief or ritual, or a natural phenomenon.

 

Bill (repeating himself)

[Aubrey]

Tell these knuckleheads that you belong to a community that actually cares about Classical Education (so much so that they capitalized it :D) and that you are not about to suffer fools gladly when it comes to vandalizing the pillars of our culture. :tongue_smilie:

 

Bill

 

Well, since I don't actually *know* Greek, I think I'd sound pretty silly saying that. ;)

 

I did try to study along w/ dh, in hopes of fulfilling one of my sub-goals of doing a comparative language study between the two kinds of Greek. Unfortunately, I don't seem to want to learn the language badly enough at this juncture in life. :001_huh:

 

The difference has something to do w/ the common language--Biblical Greek--what the fishermen would have used & the high-brow stuff of Homer. Still, though, both. are. Greek. I will never believe that there is no relationship between the two. But I'm stubborn like that. :001_huh:

[Aubrey]

A traditional story, typically involving supernatural beings or forces, which embodies and provides an explanation, aetiology [provides causation], or justification for something such as the early history of a society, a religious belief or ritual, or a natural phenomenon.

 

Bill (repeating himself)

 

Yeah, yeah, yeah. You said that before, but it sounds like gobbledy-gook. I like this definition better (of which surely you will approve):

 

Myth is neither. It is a scared tale that explains the origin of things. Genesis is a Judeo-Christian myth. The term "myth" gives no value judgements to the truth or falsity of the tales as "history" it merely acknowledges the high importance placed on these tales by the cultures that believe them. To be called a "myth" elevates a sacred story to a position of high cultural honor.

 

Plus, while I know that there is no judgment intended in the former, it still comes across as one. The latter sounds like it's the summation of all of mankind's *wondering* & should therefore be spoken only in a whisper & perhaps only by a child.

[Spy Car]

I was just thinking about how the meaning might have originally split.

 

It doesn't take much imagination. Someone decided the other guys sacred stories were rubbish, called them "myths" (in the barbarian sense of the word) and said they'd punch anyone who called their own sacred stories by the same name. It is Dumb and Dumber.

 

Bill

[Aubrey]

It doesn't take much imagination. Someone decided the other guys sacred stories were rubbish, called them "myths" (in the barbarian sense of the word) and said they'd punch anyone who called their own sacred stories by the same name. It is Dumb and Dumber.

 

Bill

 

That doesn't make sense! That would be like if I said your shoes stink & then start using "shoes" as a synonym for "stink" despite the previously agreed-upon definition. And then making up some other word for mine, so I could claim that mine don't stink.

 

I think there had to be something to cause people to first start thinking that "myth" meant "untrue." Then, sure--people started using the term to describe *other people's* religion.

 

In all fairness, though, when I was growing up, I thought "myth" meant the religion of a culture that had died out. So while I also thought "myth" meant a kind of untrue, made-up story, I never heard a *living* religion referred to as a myth. I would have been just as shocked to hear someone say that Genesis is a myth as I would have been to hear them say the story of the Buddha is a myth.

 

I think that in presenting only ancient myths, educators have inadvertently taught that myths are *only* ancient. I mean, you were *supposed* to laugh at how ridiculous those stories about Olympus were since we have science now. I was the oddball who asked, "But aren't we basically doing the same thing when we blindly believe whatever our teachers tell us w/out understanding or being able to prove it on our own? I mean--how do WE know the earth is round or the sun is the center of the universe? Maybe we haven't changed as much as we think we have."

 

But all they heard was, "How do we know the earth is round?" and they laughed, because that was a dumb question. ;)

[Spy Car]

Plus, while I know that there is no judgment intended in the former, it still comes across as one. The latter sounds like it's the summation of all of mankind's *wondering* & should therefore be spoken only in a whisper & perhaps only by a child.

 

What culture ever spoke of their creation stories and sacred traditions in a whisper?

 

People do wonder how we came to be, how it all came to be. Myth offers answers to these eternal questions. If stories do not speak to these questions they are not myth. The term is value neutral, and that bothers some people, but having a value neutral term is valuable for scholarship.

 

Bill

[Aubrey]

What culture ever spoke of their creation stories and sacred traditions in a whisper?

 

People do wonder how we came to be, how it all came to be. Myth offers answers to these eternal questions. If stories do not speak to these questions they are not myth. The term is value neutral, and that bothers some people, but having a value neutral term is valuable for scholarship.

 

Bill

 

I think I was unclear. I didn't mean "whisper" in a negative sense, but in the sense of denoting awe. I was trying to compliment your definition.

[Spy Car]

That doesn't make sense! That would be like if I said your shoes stink & then start using "shoes" as a synonym for "stink" despite the previously agreed-upon definition. And then making up some other word for mine, so I could claim that mine don't stink.

 

I think there had to be something to cause people to first start thinking that "myth" meant "untrue." Then, sure--people started using the term to describe *other people's* religion.

 

People saw the religion of the Greeks, and saw the Greeks understood their stories as myth (in the Classical sense of the word) and decided that their own religious stories (unlike the false stories of the Greeks) were God-breathed Truth. So they conflated the term Mythos with falsehood without ever understanding what mythos meant in the first place. Unedumicated.

 

In all fairness, though, when I was growing up, I thought "myth" meant the religion of a culture that had died out. So while I also thought "myth" meant a kind of untrue, made-up story, I never heard a *living* religion referred to as a myth. I would have been just as shocked to hear someone say that Genesis is a myth as I would have been to hear them say the story of the Buddha is a myth

 

Your experience is probably "typical" because few people are raised with a Classical Education these days. But that is what we aspire to for our own children, yes? Not raise barbarians?

 

I think that in presenting only ancient myths, educators have inadvertently taught that myths are *only* ancient. I mean, you were *supposed* to laugh at how ridiculous those stories about Olympus were since we have science now. I was the oddball who asked, "But aren't we basically doing the same thing when we blindly believe whatever our teachers tell us w/out understanding or being able to prove it on our own? I mean--how do WE know the earth is round or the sun is the center of the universe? Maybe we haven't changed as much as we think we have."

 

But all they heard was, "How do we know the earth is round?" and they laughed, because that was a dumb question. ;)

 

Funny story :D

 

The difference between science and myth is the latter usually involves the actions of supernatural beings or gods as part of an explanation for which adherents don't demand proof. Science, in contrast, is evidence based.

 

Bill

[Spy Car]

I think I was unclear. I didn't mean "whisper" in a negative sense, but in the sense of denoting awe. I was trying to compliment your definition.

 

I think it is a pretty much universal part of human nature (except among the truly incurious) to feel in awe and wonder about all that surrounds us (including our own selves) came to be. This is the huge mystery!

 

It intrigues virtually everyone. Myth speaks to the questions we all have about the origin of our world and our place in the universe. It is not a dead topic for the ancients.

 

Bill

[Aubrey]

The difference between science and myth is the latter usually involves the actions of supernatural beings or gods as part of an explanation for which adherents don't demand proof. Science, in contrast, is evidence based.

 

My point was just that none of us laughing 8yos was demanding any proof. We were just swallowing the tales of the textbook hook, line, & sinker.

 

And really, it's not like most of us outgrow that. I have not, personally, checked the science or the math (or whatever it is they use to determine things like that) of the sun's position, or the earth's, or whether Pluto is a planet or a planetoid.

 

I'm not trying to say that science is a myth...although...in the classical sense, it almost is, isn't it? I wonder if the divine beings are intrinsic to myth or accidental?

 

Anyway, my point was just that we still seem to be myth-based creatures--accepting stories that we are told as children--that the moon is made of cheese & Pluto is a planet. ;)

 

Which I'm pretty sure has nothing to do w/ the original thread, lol.

[Aubrey]

I think it is a pretty much universal part of human nature (except among the truly incurious) to feel in awe and wonder about all that surrounds us (including our own selves) came to be. This is the huge mystery!

 

It intrigues virtually everyone. Myth speaks to the questions we all have about the origin of our world and our place in the universe. It is not a dead topic for the ancients.

 

Bill

 

It sounds like we're agreeing. Are we agreeing?

[Hillary in KS]

A traditional story, typically involving supernatural beings or forces, which embodies and provides an explanation, aetiology [provides causation], or justification for something such as the early history of a society, a religious belief or ritual, or a natural phenomenon.

 

 

 

Yeah, yeah, yeah. You said that before, but it sounds like gobbledy-gook.

 

 

Bill's been quoting the Oxford English Dictionary. I'd stick with that one, rather than attempt to create another. :001_smile:

[Spy Car]

My point was just that none of us laughing 8yos was demanding any proof. We were just swallowing the tales of the textbook hook, line, & sinker.

 

And really, it's not like most of us outgrow that. I have not, personally, checked the science or the math (or whatever it is they use to determine things like that) of the sun's position, or the earth's, or whether Pluto is a planet or a planetoid.

 

I'm not trying to say that science is a myth...although...in the classical sense, it almost is, isn't it? I wonder if the divine beings are intrinsic to myth or accidental?

 

Anyway, my point was just that we still seem to be myth-based creatures--accepting stories that we are told as children--that the moon is made of cheese & Pluto is a planet. ;)

 

Which I'm pretty sure has nothing to do w/ the original thread, lol.

 

That an 8 year old (other than you) isn't demanding proof, doesn't mean there isn't proof (otherwise it isn't valid science). Has there ever been pseudo-science passed off as real science to those unable to discern the difference? Sure.

 

Divine beings or supernatural forces are intrinsic to myth. The classification of Pluto is not a myth, it is just a a reassessment of what qualities a planetary formation would have to possess for us to call it a "planet." The nature of Pluto did not change.

 

The moon being made of a Green Cheese is not a myth either. It does not explain origins, and it has never been believed to offer answers of creation to any culture. Tall tale, fable, not myth.

 

Bill

[Spy Car]

It sounds like we're agreeing. Are we agreeing?

 

I believe we are :D

 

Bill

[Aubrey]

The moon being made of a Green Cheese is not a myth either. It does not explain origins, and it has never been believed to offer answers of creation to any culture. Tall tale, fable, not myth.

 

Oh, Bill, you literalist! I wasn't actually trying to say that Pluto & moon cheese were myths. I realize that that is a gross underestimation of a myth. I was just trying to give light-hearted examples of things a kid might believe. It was tongue-in-cheek.

 

And...gosh I hate the creeping feeling that I'm beating a dead horse, but this is exactly how it is around our house, sometimes even w/ the kids here, interrupting, screaming, etc...wouldn't the Catholic church have argued in the time of Copernicus that there was "proof" that the earth was the center of the universe? It's always the experts & the scholars & the priests who are making up the rules about what's what & governing or protecting the "evidence."

 

Even if the common people demanded evidence, such as Scripture in the middle ages or math now, someone has to teach that evidence & interpret it. I can see & prove for myself that 2 + 2 = 4, but there's a lot more math than that involved in placing the planets. I have enough trouble believing/understanding/remembering the meaning of sine, cosine, & tangent, much less anything beyond that.

 

Dh says we know the scientists are right because the Mars Rover thingamajigs have never missed. I accept that, but secretly? I wonder how we *know* there *are* Mars Rover thingamajigs. I see the possibility that we've never been to the moon. When I say this, though (& I don't always), he just shudders. :D

[Spy Car]

Oh, Bill, you literalist! I wasn't actually trying to say that Pluto & moon cheese were myths. I realize that that is a gross underestimation of a myth. I was just trying to give light-hearted examples of things a kid might believe. It was tongue-in-cheek.

 

And...gosh I hate the creeping feeling that I'm beating a dead horse, but this is exactly how it is around our house, sometimes even w/ the kids here, interrupting, screaming, etc...wouldn't the Catholic church have argued in the time of Copernicus that there was "proof" that the earth was the center of the universe? It's always the experts & the scholars & the priests who are making up the rules about what's what & governing or protecting the "evidence."

 

Even if the common people demanded evidence, such as Scripture in the middle ages or math now, someone has to teach that evidence & interpret it. I can see & prove for myself that 2 + 2 = 4, but there's a lot more math than that involved in placing the planets. I have enough trouble believing/understanding/remembering the meaning of sine, cosine, & tangent, much less anything beyond that.

 

Dh says we know the scientists are right because the Mars Rover thingamajigs have never missed. I accept that, but secretly? I wonder how we *know* there *are* Mars Rover thingamajigs. I see the possibility that we've never been to the moon. When I say this, though (& I don't always), he just shudders. :D

 

The evidence Copernicus offered up could be proved or disproved by others with equal or greater competence or greater access to technology than himself. The "evidence" of those who claim the authority for "evidence" based on their understanding of the mind of a supernatural being (or beings) is something that can not be proved or disproved. Myth can not be disproved, it operates in another sphere.

 

Bill

[JeneralMom]

I voted for the first option, because although I feel 1 and 2 could fit, I object to the word "ancient" in front of the "fiction". There are many modern myths, too.

[Onceuponatime]

I think it is a pretty much universal part of human nature (except among the truly incurious) to feel in awe and wonder about all that surrounds us (including our own selves) came to be. This is the huge mystery!

 

It intrigues virtually everyone. Myth speaks to the questions we all have about the origin of our world and our place in the universe. It is not a dead topic for the ancients.

 

Bill

 

I'm trying to follow the conversation, forgive me for any misunderstandings. The most common way myth is used in the world around me definitely includes value judgements. I understand your definition, but isn't language fluid? The nuances change whether we want them to or not. I use to be a diehard traditionalist, but now I'm wondering if the struggle to maintain definitions is a battle worth fighting. I'm all for understanding the origins and histories of words, but is usage one of those hills to die on?

[lionfamily1999]

I chose other. People use the word "myth" in different ways. I try to understand it as they are trying to use it.

[Spy Car]

I'm trying to follow the conversation, forgive me for any misunderstandings. The most common way myth is used in the world around me definitely includes value judgements. I understand your definition, but isn't language fluid? The nuances change whether we want them to or not. I use to be a diehard traditionalist, but now I'm wondering if the struggle to maintain definitions is a battle worth fighting. I'm all for understanding the origins and histories of words, but is usage one of those hills to die on?

 

For me it is a hill to die on. There is no alternative value-neutral term that holds the complexity of meaning that "myth" does. Exploring the myths of the worlds cultures is, and has been for thousands upon thousands of years, an important part of understanding those cultures and civilizations. It is an import part of a Classical Education.

 

It is "relativism" to say say, just because many people misuse the term, that "wrong" is the new "right". Embrace your die-hard traditionalism, we need you, or the barbarians win. :D

 

Bill

[Denise in Florida]

Conceding the use of the term myth (mythos) as a synonym of "falsehood" is giving up a fine and important term (that is important to Classical Education) to the ignorance of the barbarians. Hold the line. Take no prisoners.

 

Just because 90% (or more) of the people are numbskulls does not mean you have to be one.

 

Bill (traditionalist)

 

:iagree:

[Aubrey]

I chose other. People use the word "myth" in different ways. I try to understand it as they are trying to use it.

 

LOL! That's a great answer! (But what about when *you* are using it?)

[Aubrey]

For me it is a hill to die on. There is no alternative value-neutral term that holds the complexity of meaning that "myth" does. Exploring the myths of the worlds cultures is, and has been for thousands upon thousands of years, an important part of understanding those cultures and civilizations. It is an import part of a Classical Education.

 

It is "relativism" to say say, just because many people misuse the term, that "wrong" is the new "right". Embrace your die-hard traditionalism, we need you, or the barbarians win. :D

 

Bill

 

I tend to prefer not to fight people on language (except dh), but I love so much of what you've said defending the traditional approach, esp the part bolded above. Mainly because dh is always ranting about relativism, & I can just see that statement short-circuiting his wiring, & then we'd both laugh.

 

Before this thread, I really viewed both of the first options as valid, but, Bill, I think you've convinced me to delete the "fiction" definition from my system. I *love* the idea of the history & depth of meaning behind the first def (or a better version of it, if you insist), & I guess I'll have to tell dh I won't frindle that definition after all. He was really excited that someone would invent a new word for him, but alas! There may be greater issues at stake here.

 

(I'm saying this in a light-hearted way because I think it's important not to take oneself or language *too* seriously, but I do mean what I've written. Huh. I hope this is coming out clearly. Anyway, I've really enjoyed the conversation!)

[Night Elf]

Really other: I think it's a made up story that is perpetuated because some think it is true. I think myths are still produced today and not only ancient. I stick to the 'falsehood' definition and don't seek any deeper definition.

[Mrs Mungo]

As I was saying. He argued that since Def #1 of myth did not come up in his history degree & since he is well-read, it can be assumed that most people don't know Def #1 & will therefore likely be offended by such use, since they'll assume Def #2. He thinks only scholars know Def #1 & therefore, since no one cares about them, common usage dictates that only Def #2 should be used *now.* He pointed out the organic, fluxuating nature of language in his defense.

 

I think he is 100% correct on this point and it has been proven *many, many* times on this board. For example, whenever anyone asks for a recommendation for a "Christian mythology" book.

 

 

To me a myth is both A story of primary significance to a culture, and Ancient fiction. but with roots in a real event, which has been distorted and exaggerated over time.

so I voted other.

 

I tend to agree, but I voted both. :D

 

But you are using "fiction" as a synonym for "falsehood."

 

Myth is neither. It is a scared tale that explains the origin of things. Genesis is a Judeo-Christian myth. The term "myth" gives no value judgements to the truth or falsity of the tales as "history" it merely acknowledges the high importance placed on these tales by the cultures that believe them. To be called a "myth" elevates a sacred story to a position of high cultural honor.

 

 

I think your definition should be expanded. I think myths include things such as Columbus discovering America, George Washington and the cherry tree, etc. These are myths involving the culture, values and origins of the United States. They are held as sacred and true by a certain percentage of the population.

[mcconnellboys]

We may consider myths "ancient fiction" today, but most who told the stories during ancient times did not consider them fiction....

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I have also heard myth used in the sense of "you may think that this story is of primary significance, but I (wiser and more knowledgeable than you) know better that it is only supersticious nonsense".

 

And to get your dh to ponder the subject more, this was how it was used by a professor of mine to refer to an aspect of Christian theology when we were discussing the allegory Pearl. I think his words were, "Well, according to the Christian myth . . ." [Of course it didn't help the class discussion that he then made a statement that I've never seen a Christian claim and that he was then jumped on by half of the class, who happened to be active in a variety of Christian student groups of several different flavors. He did not choose to use that phrasing again. :lol:]

 

In a similar way, I think that there is a history in missions of referring to something as myth in order to dismiss it as irrelevant.

 

I don't really see how you can escape the realization that when you label something as myth, you are making a value judgement on the veracity of that story. But your judgement may not at all be the opinion of those whose story it is. If you don't realize this difference of perspective, then you will be less prepared for the ensuing conflict.