ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Toward a theory of myth
Jon Mills,
Corresponding Author
Jon Mills
Gordon F. Derner School of Psychology, Adelphi University, Garden City, New York, USA
Correspondence
Jon Mills, Gordon F. Derner School of Psychology, Adelphi University, Garden City, NY, USA.
Email: psychologist@sympatico.ca
Search for more papers by this authorJon Mills,
Corresponding Author
Jon Mills
Gordon F. Derner School of Psychology, Adelphi University, Garden City, New York, USA
Correspondence
Jon Mills, Gordon F. Derner School of Psychology, Adelphi University, Garden City, NY, USA.
Email: psychologist@sympatico.ca
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
Why do we need a theory of myth? Because no systematic theory exists, let alone a consensus. What I am particularly interested in addressing are not specific theories of myth, or specific myths themselves, but rather what constitutes a good theory. In particular, throughout our investigation I hope to illuminate what a proper theory of myth would be expected to offer in terms of its descriptive and explanatory power, coherency, generality, meaningfulness, and functional utility. Here I offer a theoretic typology of myth by exploring the origin, signification, symbolic structure, and essence of myth in terms of its source, force, form, object, and teleology derived from archaic ontology. Through my analysis of an explanandum and an explanans, I argue that both interpretation and explanation are acts of explication that signify the ontological significance, truth, and psychic reality of myth in both individuals and social collectives.
REFERENCES
- Anderson, A. A. (2004). Mythos, logos, and telos: How to regain the love of wisdom. In A. A. Anderson, S. V. Hicks, & L. Witkowski (Eds.), Mythos and logos: How to regain the love of wisdom. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Rodopi.
- Aristotle. (1984). Meteorology. In J. Barnes (Ed.), The complete works of Aristotle (Vol. 2). (The revised oxford trans) (pp. 555–625). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
- Bergström, L. (1990). Explanation and interpretation of action. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 4(1), 3–15. http://doi.org/10.1080/0269859900857334
10.1080/02698599008573342 Google Scholar
- Calder, B. J., & Tybout, A. M. (2016). What makes a good theory practical? AMS Review, 6, 116–124. http://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-016-0084-1
10.1007/s13162-016-0084-1 Google Scholar
- Chase, R. (1949). Quest for myth. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press.
- Collingwood, R. G. (1946). The idea of history. T. M. Knox (Ed.), New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
- Corley, K., & Gioia, D. (2011). Building theory about theory building: What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 36, 12–32.
- Dilthey, W. (1883/1923). Introduction to the human sciences, R. J. Betanzos (Trans.). Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press, 1979.
- Eliade, M. (1963). Myth and reality. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
- Estrada, M., & Schultz, P. W. (2017). The use of theory in applied social psychology. In A. P. Buunk, K. Keizer, L. Steg, & T. Rothengatter (Eds.), Applied social psychology: Understanding and managing social problems ( 2nd ed., pp. 27–51). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. http://doi.org/10.1017/9781107358430.002
10.1017/9781107358430.002 Google Scholar
- Faye, J. (2011). Explanation and interpretation in the sciences of man. In D. Dieks, W. Gonzalez, S. Hartmann, T. Uebel, & M. Weber (Eds.), Explanation, prediction, and confirmation: The philosophy of science in a European perspective (Vol. 2, pp. 269–279). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
- Feldman, B., & Richardson, R. D. (1972). The rise of modern mythology, 1680-1860. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
- Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2015). Theory evaluation. In B. Gawronski & G. V. Bodenhausen (Eds.), Theory and explanation in social psychology (pp. 3–23). New York, NY: Guilford Publications.
- Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York, NY: Basic Books.
- Gibbs, J. P. (1990). The notion of theory in sociology. National Journal of Sociology, 4, 129–159.
- Gieseler, K., Loschelder, D. D., & Friese, M. (2019). What makes for a good theory? How to evaluate a theory using the strength model of self-control as an example. In K. Sassenberg & M. Vliek (Eds.), Social psychology in action. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
10.1007/978-3-030-13788-5_1 Google Scholar
- Heidegger, M. (1927). Being and Time. J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson (Trans.). San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1962.
- Homer. (800 B.C.E.). The Odyssey. Samuel Butler (Trans). Retrieved from http://classics.mit.edu/Homer/odyssey.html
- Homer. (800 B.C.E.). The Iliad. Samuel Butler (Trans). Retrieved from http://classics.mit.edu/Homer/iliad.html
- Kuhn, T. S. (1974). Objectivity, value judgment, and theory choice. In T. S. Kuhn (Ed.), The essential tension: Selected studies in the scientific tradition and change (pp. 356–368). Chicago, UK: University of Chicago Press, 1977.
- Liddell, H. G., & Scott, R. (1843). A Greek-English Lexicon (Vol. 2). Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
- Lipton, P. (2004). Inference to the best explanation. London, UK: Routledge.
- Mills, J. (2020). The essence of myth. Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research, 37(2), 191–205. http://doi.org/10.1007/s40961-020-00198-3
- Mills, J. (2019). Listening to the other: On the theory versus research debate in psychoanalysis. Paper presentation for panel: [Re]Claiming a space for the voice of research in psychoanalytic discourse. Society for psychoanalysis & psychoanalytic psychology. Philadelphia, PA: Division 39 of the American Psychoanalytic Association April 5.
- Mills, J. (2015). Psychoanalysis and the ideologies of science. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 35, 24–44.
- Mills, J. (2014). Truth. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 62(2), 267–293.
- Mills, J. (2013). Freedom and determinism. The Humanistic Psychologist, 41(2), 101–118.
10.1080/08873267.2012.694128 Google Scholar
- Plato. (1961). Phaedo. In E. Hamilton & H. Cairns (Eds.), The collected dialogues of plato (pp. 40–98). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
- Plato. (1961). Republic. In E. Hamilton & H. Cairns (Eds.), The collected dialogues of plato. (pp. 575–844). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
- Popper, K. R. (1965). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. New York, NY: Harper.
- Ricoeur, P. (1981). Hermeneutics and the human sciences. J. B. Thompson (Trans.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.1017/CBO9781316534984 Google Scholar
- Ricoeur, P. (1971). What is a text? Explanation and interpretation. In D. M. Rasmussen (Ed.), Mythic-symbolic language and philosophical anthropology (pp. 135–150). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
- N. Roubekas, & T. Ryba (Eds.). (2020). Explaining, interpreting, and theorizing religion and myth: Contributions in honor of Robert A. Segal. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill.
10.1163/9789004435025 Google Scholar
- Ryle, G. (1971). Collected papers (Vol. 2). London, UK: Hutchinson.
- Segal, R. A. (2014). Weber, Geertz, and Ricoeur on explanation and interpretation. Bulletin for the Study of Religion, 43(1), 25–33.
10.1558/bsor.v43i1.25 Google Scholar
- Segal, R. A. (2014). Explanation and interpretation. In R. A. Jones (Ed.), Jung and the question of science (pp. 82–97). London, UK: Routledge.
- Segal, R. A. (2009). Religion as ritual: Roy Rappaport's changing views from pigs of the ancestors (1968) to ritual and religion in the making of humanity (1999). In M. Stausberg (Ed.), Contemporary theories of religion: A critical companion (pp. 66–82). London, UK: Routledge.
- Segal, R. A. (2004). Myth: A very short introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
10.1093/actrade/9780192803474.001.0001 Google Scholar
- Segal, R. A. (1999). Theorizing about myth. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press.
- Segal, R. A. (1992). Explaining and interpreting religion. New York, NY: Lang.
- Shalley, C. E. (2012). Writing good theory: Issues to consider. Organizational Psychology Review, 2(3), 258–264. http://doi.org/10.1177/2041386611436029
- Van Lange, P. A. M. (2013). What we should expect from theories in social psychology: Truth, abstraction, progress, and applicability as standards (TAPAS). Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17, 40–55. http://doi.org/10.1177/1088868312453088
- Weber, M. (1968). Economy and society (Vol. 1). E. Fischoff (Trans.), G. Roth & C. Wittich (Eds.). New York, NY: Bedminster Press.
- Ye, H., & Stam, H. (2013). What is a good theory? A perspective from theoretical psychology. Acta Psychology Sinica, 44, 133–137. http://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2012.00133
10.3724/SP.J.1041.2012.00133 Google Scholar
