Re: MD Philosophy and Theology

From: Elizaphanian (elizaphanian@tiscali.co.uk)
Date: Mon Apr 07 2003 - 11:17:26 BST

  • Next message: Elizaphanian: "Re: MD Philosophy and Theology"

    Hi David (this will be about number 2 of 8 or so.....)

    > DMB says:
    > Here's the problem. I keep saying that the problem with religion today is
    > that most people mistake myths for facts, which is not to say they aren't
    > true. The take a myth for a fact is to misunderstand the myth. Sure, the
    > intellect can read the symbolism of a myth and detect its meaning, but
    that
    > is not taking it literally. More importantly, such philosophical analysis
    > can not replace the function of the myth. As in the quote about the
    > resonance of an "affect image", its not supposed to be understood as an
    > intellectual concept, but experienced directly so that a more ancient
    level
    > is stirred. It can be described and analyzed later, but it that is the
    ONLY
    > way a myth can be related or understood, then it is dead and its power is
    > gone.

    I largely agree with this. I would want to add (which I think you would
    agree with) that the misinterpretation derives from SOM/Modernist thinking -
    and as such, I would say that the misinterpretation was not current in
    'classical' Christianity.

    > So its not just a matter of rampant fundamentalism, scientific
    > materialism and widespread misunderstanding, althought that's true too,
    but
    > that the mythological images of our culture are very far removed from the
    > kind of world that we live in that they can no longer function, they can
    no
    > longer evoke in us what they used to. We can try to do some literary
    > archeology and try to reconstruct the context in which these symbols
    > actually had a living meaning, but the very fact that we need to do that
    > only shows how dead they are. I think the underlying message and meaning
    of
    > the world's great religions is still perfectly valid, but that we need an
    > appropriate mythology to express it, one that doesn't have all the
    apparent
    > contradictions with our world view.

    I would (obviously) disagree about the extent to which particular
    mythologies are dead - they're dead for you, but that doesn't mean that they
    are necessarily dead for other people - but otherwise, I agree. I think that
    a mythology *can* die.

    Sam

    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 : Mon Apr 07 2003 - 12:17:40 BST