Can the "myth – reality" relationship not be binary?
I wonder if there might be a third, such as a transition, component.
Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
I really like the question, so I'll try to answer it.
Disclaimer: Please do not pay attention to my expert status, it belongs to a different field.
Omitting the definitions of the concepts “myth” and “reality” (I think that in general terms most people understand the meaning uniformly), we should try to answer the question of what could be an intermediate entity.
The subjective reality of a person based on his subjective ideas and experience, or, to put it another way, a person's subjective idea of reality – I believe this.
On the other hand, if, for example, it turns out that our reality (“real reality”) in some part has the properties to change, to manifest itself according to some influence of the observer's consciousness (that is, at some level, the properties of real objects depend on the nature of the orientation of the observer's consciousness), then this level of reality will also, in a sense, have blurred boundaries with myth.
And it's never binary. There is always a real basis for any myth.
It's just that sometimes they hide it very deeply.
And you can only find it with the help of historians and archaeologists.