Lol. I like my Jungian archetypes. I mean, the original Star Wars trilogy was amazing. But some people seem to have a need for what I'll charitably call deeper meaning in their lives. Simple dismissal of religious or dogmatic thought may not be the wisest thing. Maybe.
It is not semantic to separate emotional, psychological and behavioural effects of a narrative from the factual truth or falsity of the claims within it. That is essential.
-
-
I don't follow. In what way do stories make claims?
-
??? Consider the bible. Consider news stories. Consider propaganda stories and inspirational narratives. If they make us feel good or seem to have a profound meaning but are not established to be true factual accounts, we must say this.
-
What would you say to what I have seen? That if people follow behaviors seen in hero myths, there is a positive correlation with wellbeing. What do we call these observations, it seems the word truth applies but in a different way then in speaking to facts.
-
You can say that people can experience positive benefits from following narratives which are not true. If evidenced, it is true that this happens. The narrative remains untrue. Perhaps someone is inspired by the bravery and honest of Harry Potter?
-
Joe Rogan gave a good example. Believing that porcupines can throw their spines could prevent people from getting close to porcupines and reduce risk of accidentally touching it and injuring self. There is a benefit to believing that. It doesn't become true.
-
If ancient people believed that God said that seafood was unclean, they avoided food poisoning in times when this was not understood. That belief was beneficial. There is still no reason to think God exists or said that.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.