Stephen Harris wrote:
> Immortalist wrote:
>> The Hero with a Thousand Faces (1949) is the seminal work of
>> comparative mythologist Joseph Campbell. In this text Campbell
>> discusses his theory of the journey of the archetypal hero found in
>> world mythologies and religions.
>>
>> Campbell's insight was that important myths from around the world which
>> have survived for thousands of years, all share a fundamental
>> structure, which Campbell called the monomyth.
>>
>
>> THE SHORT FORM OF THE HERO STORY:
>>
>> The hero is introduced in his ordinary world, where he receives the
>> call to adventure. He is reluctant at first but is encouraged by
>> the wise old man or woman to cross the first threshold, where he
>> encounters tests and helpers. He reaches the innermost cave, where
>> he endures the supreme ordeal. He seizes the sword or the treasure
>> and is pursued on the road back to his world. He is resurrected and
>> transformed by his experience. He returns to his ordinary world with
>> a treasure, boon, or elixir to benefit his world.
>>
>>
http://www.skepticfiles.org/atheist2/hero.htm
>>
>
> This subject will eventually point to archetypes.
>
> Why is the Illiad remembered for centuries?
> Why is Shakespeare remembered?
>
> A little closer to your point, did you know that
> "The Lord of The Rings" by Tolkien has been the
> best selling book besides the Bible for the last
> 50 years? Frodo and Bilbo both make Hero's Journeys.
>
Could we avoid making a Hero's journey, I think not & it is likely our
lot.
Habituation satiation, change and attention. We come upon conflicts and
attempt to resolve them, sometimes becoming an example portrayed in
some sort of learning story for others, hence the Hero, the one that is
one of many folowable examples.
I read the Lord of the Rings when I was a teenager.
> Writers try to emulate Tolkien and fail so it is not
> just the "story" but the way it is written, its inner
> consistency.
>
Each story is like a game then? It is common sense to understand why
different games have different rules. All the while the universal
collection of universals influence the rules of each game similarly.
> What is it about the story that coincides with the mutual
> recognition/approval within our consensus reality which
> eventually gets measured as book sales?
>
Identification with the protagonist, as far as fiction goes, and a
workable example of "how to do it."
Here is an important line of text from the paste below;
According to Leon Festinger, when physical
reality becomes increasingly uncertain, people
rely more and more on "social reality"-that is,
they are more likely to conform to what other
people are doing, not because they fear
punishment from the group but because the
group's behavior supplies them with valuable
information about what is expected of them.
----------------------
Rewards and Punishments Versus Information
As I suggested earlier, there are two possible reasons why people like
us might conform. One is that the behavior of others might convince us
that our initial judgment was erroneous. The other is that we may wish
to avoid punishment (such as rejection or ridicule) or to gain a reward
(such as love or acceptance) from the group. The behavior of the
individuals in Asch's experiment and in similar other experiments
seemed to be largely a matter of attempting to obtain a reward or to
avoid punishment. This can be inferred from the fact that there was
very little conformity when subjects were allowed to respond privately.
At the same time, there are many situations in which we conform to the
behavior of others because their behavior is our only guide to
appropriate action. In short, we often rely on other people as a means
of determining reality. The quotation from Thurber at the beginning of
this chapter gives an example of this type of conformity. According to
Leon Festinger, when physical reality becomes increasingly uncertain,
people rely more and more on "social reality"-that is, they are more
likely to conform to what other people are doing, not because they fear
punishment from the group but because the group's behavior supplies
them with valuable information about what is expected of them. An
example should help clarify this distinction: Suppose that you need to
use the toilet in an unfamiliar classroom building. Under the sign
"Rest Rooms" there are two doors, but unfortunately, a vandal has
removed the specific designations from the doors; that is, you cannot
be certain which is the men's room and which is the women's room. Quite
a dilemma-you are afraid to open either door for fear of being
embarrassed or embarrassing others. As you stand there in dismay and
discomfort, hopping from one foot to the other, the door on your left
opens and out strolls a distinguished-looking gentleman. With a sigh of
relief, you are now willing to forge ahead, reasonably secure in the
knowledge that left is for men and right is for women. Why are you so
confident? As we have seen, research has shown that the more faith an
individual has in the expertise and trustworthiness of the other
person, the greater the tendency to follow his or her lead and conform
to his or her behavior. Thus, the distinguished-looking gentleman would
almost certainly be followed to a greater extent than, say, a
seedy-looking fellow with wildly darting eyes.
Indeed, research on jaywalking indicates that people will conform more
often to the behavior of a seemingly high-status person than to the
behavior of someone who looks less respectable or less well-to-do.
Across several studies, researchers have found that, when in the
presence of a model who refrains from jaywalking, other pedestrians are
more likely to curb the impulse to jaywalk compared with control
subjects who are not exposed to any model. This conformity effect is
much stronger, however, when the person modeling the behavior is neat
and well attired rather than disheveled and dressed in shabby clothes.
The Social Animal - Elliot Aronson - 8th Edition 1999
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0716733129/
> One will probably answer some type of collective unconscious
> which "exists" but will surely have an ineffable description
> and not capturable by a computer program (algorithm). A mental
> realm in the category which contains a "soul" (dualist).
>
But then the activities of the brain have been proposed to be
sufficient for being all human experience and subjectivity in general.
This by common and not specialized science.
> Or one can propose the physicalist answer which says the mind
> is generated by the brain. Humans have the same basic genetic
> structure/blueprint for a brain, we live in the same general
> environment (which has limited degrees of freedom)so we
> share the same general perception of what reality is, which
> does not require knowing what reality really is.
>
This is an old debate deserving of little attention. The evidence
provided by neurology has killed the argument actually, but not
necessarily so, only comparatively so, for it would be absurd to
attempt to refute neurological evidence of nerve activities.
> They talk about the "unreasonable effectiveness" of mathematics.
> This comes about since the abstract constructs are built by the
> same tool which generates our human construct of reality. Brains
> contribute to survival, perceiving events as causes and effects
> over a period of time. Humans don't have the type of consciousness
> needed to make posts on Usenet without memory measuring the
> passage of time.
>
They are a dead argument since they cannot answer to the evidence of
science.
> Humans are born, live and come to an end. Any allegory which
> captures this process as a "truth" will be recognized. There
> is nothing about Campbell's Hero's Journey which distinguishes
> it as "real" (as in I can put a coat on if I get cold) intrinsic
> part of reality from an abstract analogical idea which is a
> concept such as "memes". The thing about positing archetypes is
> the question, what is the mechanism for their continued existence,
> what makes them enduring, which is a question which can also be
> asked about karma and working off past life "lessons".
>
>From Hegel's chronological stage theory of history to language
aquisition instincts, the idea of stages is common. Campbell's stage
view is just one amoungst many, but a good one since it accounts for
many things past and present simualtainiously.
> You aren't going to be able to find any physical evidence that
> the pattern of a Hero's Journey is imprinted into the fabric of
> reality just like other abstract ideas such as truth or justice.
Actually the critical stage theory in neurology and developmental
psychology have pretty much settled this matter and we do have good
evidence for many layers of universal stages that things go through,
especially humans.
I suppose that Campbell's stages, as far as they conform to our
biological stages, could have some physical evidence.
http://tinyurl.com/t3ohn
> If you were to examine all of literature you would find recurring
> themes which capture the imagination such as courage, loyalty,
> motherly sacrifice for young and so on; the events are all going
> to have a beginning, duration and an ending.
>
If we look at the history of humans we find many different languages
but ALL of these languages are translatable into each other. All have
subjects verbs and objects.
Different languages, different accents, same elements
(subject/object/verb)
> This is not evidence that such virtual virtues have an independent
> existence apart from there physical basis. I wrote this post because
> I got the impression that you might have thought Campbell was giving
> evidence which meant something.
>
Actually it is evidence but the evidence may be much weaker than other
evidences we might produce.
> The sun plays an important part of many myths. There were also myths
> that associated the Wind with an elemental life because newborns came
> into life with convulsive first breath of air or and when people died
> they quit breathing. No matter how many myths in as many cultures there
> were/are that the wind in the forest was actually a "spirit" it would
> never provide any evidence that there was a real physical spiritual
> entity (life Death) which actually existed.
>
> There isn't anybody who knows what it means to be an adult and what
> you have to learn to become one. Nobody has a clue about what are the
> stages of a spiritual journey or if there really is any such thing as
> a spiritual journey in an objective sense (true for everyone) which
> stands apart from the self-invented choices each person adopts for
> themself if they even do that.
>
> You are all on your own, the Universe has no Parent, no wise men who
> have trod the Path before you who can pass wisdom down to you from
> some sort of completed "enlightened" perspective.
>
That would be hard to provide evidence for since you would have to have
enquired of all men as to whether they provided passable wisdom or not
and surely you have not done so.
There may or may not be a completed enlightened perspective, but I
doubt you could determine which. What would be a completed enlightened
perspective though?
> That is the 1st Step, and you can consult any Tarot deck and find
> it listed :-) Have you wondered how Tarot readings are supposed to
> work unless you first imagine a magical element like synchronicity?
>
> Regards,
> Stephen
