| Originally published to Yahoo's wittgenstein-dialognet, January 14, 2006. Note MNS = "modern natural science" in the post below (coined by Timothy E. Kennelly). Links:
In her 'Battle for God' Karen Armstrong shares her view that humans have always had two modes of information processing: the rational and the mythical. In her mythical golden age, humans weren't confused about the difference, and the two modes lived side-by-side in harmonious mutual synergy. But in modern times (her story goes), fundamentalists of various types (including some scientists) fell into the trap of thinking only the rational mode made any sense (logical positivism: the rest is nonsense). These folks then tried to "explain away" any mythological thinking as pointless superstition, and worked in earnest to purge their minds of anything "irrational." A popular older movie along these lines is 'Miracle on 34th Street' wherein a young girl is being indoctrinated by her rationalist mother to not believe in Santa Claus. When Kris Kringle comes into her life, his first move is to teach her games of the imagination, e.g. pretend you're a monkey. The American culture of that day was still resilient and flexible enough to admit Santa Claus into its case law (a precedent). I fear we've lost that flexibility today, given the rigor mortis of fundamentalist rationalism that's set in. Collectively, we've become more psychotic (so where's Kris when we need him?). We know from studying ancient Greek civilization that mythological processing was an important part of their culture: Greeks were always going to the theater, and were moved by the great tragedies, plus we hope enjoyed some more light-hearted fare. Oracles were consulted, dreams attended to. MNS types who think processing information in a mythological vein is nonsense should ask themselves why it's so hard to do well. Not everyone is a great screenwriter or thespian. Mythological thinking requires no less talent than MNS style thinking. Both are valid human modes. We need science fiction and fantasy just as surely as we need science. The human psyche is double-barrel by design (oo). The early Wittgenstein was somewhat trapped in the liberal positivism of his day, even though his thrust in the TLP was to escape it, by circumscribing it, and then putting that which had ultimate ethical value outside the empiricist circle, in the realm of silence (he'd have made a good Quaker). By the time we get to the PI, the ethical and aesthetic dimensions are more diffused throughout language, much as music is. Grammar is not fundamentally one or the other, i.e. language is not founded on a bedrock of rationality, nor on mythology. It partakes of both -- and we upset this balance at our peril (yes, I'm editorializing here). Getting back to Karen, she doesn't think this epidemic of militant rationalism is equally rampant in all cultures. While many in the west have succumbed, the world is still full of societies with healthy mythological pipelines, able to do the necessary dream weaving (an elven craft). Without their bandwidth and throughput, we'd likely have failed as a species. But fortunately, that hasn't happened yet. Praise Allah. Kirby Links: http://www.randomhouse.com/modernlibrary/karmstrong.html http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0039628/ |
|
Synergetics on the Web
|