The Survival Of Myth Despite Science Philosophy Essay

The Survival Of Myth Despite Science Philosophy Essay The survival of myth despite the advancement of science and philosophy in the classical Greek world can be explained by its connection with so many facets of Greek culture education, literature, drama, art and its importance in relation to religion, ritual and the after-life. Furthermore, the scale of the work on myth dominated that of the few philosophers and scientists, who were often only able to affect the minority. Fundamental to this question of survival is the relationship between myth (muthos) and reason (logos). In Greek, muthos means story, and relates to the medium traditionally used to describe the feats of the gods and heroes central to Greek mythology. Logos translates as word, and whilst this has numerous meanings principle, argument, explanation and reason, the generally accepted meaning is reason. The two terms then, whilst both presenting an explanation of the world, do so in contrasting ways; myth provides vivid, descriptive narrative often as a form of entertai nment, while reason presents empirical arguments supported by logic. Whilst the Greeks had previously relied on myth as a means of explanation, to reinforce social, political or ethical positions, to uncover or express tensions and dilemmas within society, or to impart a deeper message, during the fifth and fourth centuries, attitudes towards myth began to change. Both Plato and the historian Thucydides for example, associated myth with old wives tales, entertaining perhaps, but with no substance. According to Joanna Overing (1997), Myth or mythos became understood as a form of speech opposed to reasoned discourse or logos. As such myth became defined as opposed to both truth (myth is fiction) and to the rational (myth is absurd). (Overing 2) She cites Vernant as arguing that central to the new emphasis on logos over muthos is the increasing prominence of written text as against the tradition of oral poetry (Overing 2). The most significant groups involved in the change in attitude towards myth, were the Pre-Socratics and the Socratics. Pre-Socratics is the modern term for philosophers from the sixth and fifth centuries BCE, while Socratic indicates Socrates and his contemporaries. Originally, the term sophistÄâ€Å"s referred to anyone who was sophos (wise), and could apply to poets, musicians, philosophers and statesmen. In the fifth century BCE however, it began to refer a group of travelling intellectuals who specialised in tutoring persuasive speech. (While Pre-Socratic and Socratic are both terms that denote the period of the philosopher, the term sophist refers to the method, it is possible therefore, to be both Pre-Socratic and a sophist, like in the case of Protagoras.) Where Classical mythographers depended on the supernatural for their explanations, philosophers pursued the rational order that is visible in natural events. Myths, specifically in this discussion, Greek myth, tended to focus on people, whilst the Pre-Socratics were focused on finding natural explanations. The major difference however, between the Pre-Socratic philosophers and the mythographers of the time, was their approach to explaining the external world; myths, morally ambivalent and self-justifying, allow numerous explanations but the Pre-Socratics aimed to find a single cosmological principle. The first formal histories were composed by Herodotus and Thucydides in the fifth century, and these were followed by attempts by Socrates, Plato and Aristotle to know the external world through logical inquiry. Considered one of the defining moments in the human perception of the external world, these journeys into science and philosophy  [1]  represented a shift from the preceding belief of a world controlled by unpredictable gods, to that of a structured universe understood through scientific observation and rational thought (Study Guide 130). Some of the earliest speculation on this structured universe can be traced to Thales. In his Histories, Herodotus describes Thales foretelling of a solar eclipse; This change from daylight to darkness had been foretold to the Ionians by Thales of Miletus, who fixed the date for it in the year in which it did, in fact, take place. (Herodotus) By modern standards this foretelling may not seem very precise, and we can be confident that it w asnt predicted through any scientific understanding of its cause, nevertheless, Thales forecast demonstrates an understanding of the order of the world, inasmuch as he had correctly interpreted earlier observations of the phenomena by the Babylonians. Diogenes Laertius makes it clear that Protagoras, a Pre-Socratic philosopher and sophist, was fundamental to the debate of muthos versus logos; quoting Protagoras as saying, Man is the measure of all things (Laertius) and later, Where the gods are concerned, I am not in a position to ascertain that they exist, or that they do not exist (Laertius, Lives of the Eminent Philosophers 9.52). The first quote appears to be unequivocally reducing the importance of the gods in favour of man and his rational ability, however, the second quote suggests that Protagoras was actually noticeably cautious in his declarations. To further examine his thoughts, we should consider his statement that There are many impediments to such knowledge, including the obscurity of the matter and the shortness of human life. (Laertius, Lives of the Eminent Philosophers 9.52) This seems to declare that science and philosophy do not have all the answers, and in fact, may not ever find them given the shortness of hum an life. This, in contrast to a tradition of mythology that has seemingly always provided explanation, may deter any potential converters. It is difficult unfortunately, to interpret these sources accurately since we have no reliable contemporary context. However, what this example does make clear, is that the division between traditional myth and the emerging philosophies was considerable, especially when taken into account with the trial and execution of Socrates. Socrates is today probably the best-known of the ancient philosophers, not least because of the circumstance leading to his death, and was an essential figure in the intellectual developments of the fifth century BCE. His views on religion are most clearly seen in the accusation laid against him; Socrates is guilty of refusing to recognize the gods recognized by the state, and of introducing other new divinities (Laertius). However, it is difficult to be sure of exactly what Socrates beliefs were, particularly with regard to Xenophons Memoirs of Socrates, in which he argues that Socrates believed that the gods were responsible for his abilities in divination, and that therefore, if he trusted in gods, he surely must have believed in gods (Xenophon). The execution of Socrates by the State demonstrates the magnitude of the threat that they felt these new divinities posed. Although myths were not initially intended to communicate moral and/or political beliefs, as Champlin explains, the y were routinely manipulated by emperors in order to enhance their own reputation, by appropriating the gods and heroes of myth and legendary historyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦politicians could present images laden with meanings which were quickly recognizable to a broad public (Champlin 144). The rational order that philosophers were searching for could not be manipulated in the same way that myths could, leaving emperors without one of their leading advertising schemes. Poetry, literature and drama were a substantial part of the Greek culture, and central to them were the Greek myths which provided seemingly endless inspiration. The ancient writers often altered myths to suit their own agenda, be it personal choice, or to reflect the political or social influences of the time. Plato appears to view this influence of myth on society not just as unacceptable, but as almost damaging, explaining that relating myths might encourage people to mirror the actions of the gods and commit the worst crimes, yet think he is doing nothing amazing (Plato 378b2; 4). He states explicitly that the stories told by Homer, Hesiod and other poets are false (Plato 377d4-5), that they contain no moral exemplars, and that even their benefit as allegories is ineffective, since the young cannot distinguish what is allegorical from what is not (Plato 378d6). His proposal to throw out the majority of the stories is tantamount to rejecting the Greek cultural heritage, and would presumably have been viewed by many as the ultimate disrespect. There is an apparent paradox however, in that much of Platos own philosophical work is infused with myth. Murrays explanation of this is that Plato does not intend to free the mind from myth, but rather to appropriate myth from the hands of the poets and construct new myths that will serve the interests of philosophy (Murray). Platos opinions regarding what he views as the immoral behaviour of the gods are reminiscent of those of Sextus Empiricus who describes their behaviour as shameful and reprehensible (Empiricus). Also, like Plato, Sextus Empiricus names Homer and Hesiod as instrumental in circulating such immorality. He equates the gods behaviour with the worst of human behaviour; giving the examples of stealing, adultery, and deceiving one another (Empiricus), all of which appear frequently in the stories of the gods; and in doing so raises the question, If the gods are apparently morally inferior to us, are they worthy of our respect and worship? Sextus Empiricus statements exhibit the beginning of a more critical opinion of the gods that draws on logic and reason. It is possible, that Plato, and Sextus Empiricus, opinions, inadvertently facilitated the survival of myth because the Greeks were opposed to losing not only their primary means of entertainment, but indeed their heritage. In the classical Greek world, philosophers and scientists were still in relatively small numbers, and often confined to the higher classes who had the time and money to explore and experiment. This meant that their ideas only reached the minority. Since the spread of their philosophical and scientific ideas was limited, it could be argued that myth and tradition would have been maintained simply by intellectual apathy. While the developments in philosophy and science were advancing considerably, myth and tradition retained its much of its influence over the Greeks, a conflict that be seen in many of the extant texts from the time. The question of reason versus myth/religion is one that continues today; even in the modern world, where business relies on computers, international travel takes a matter of hours rather than days, weeks or even months, and where man has been to the moon, we still look toward a belief that is thousands of years old. While there are numerous reasons to explain why myth has endured, it may be a simple case of greater numbers there was so much literature about myth that, in comparison to early philosophy, it stood a greater chance of survival. In my opinion however, it has more to do with human nature; people need religion today just as much as the Ancient Greeks needed myth. This, in my opinion, is why myth survived in the face of the scientific and philosophic advances of the classical Greek world people simply need to believe in something greater than themselves.

Akbar the Great

Abu'l-Fath Jalal-ud-Din Muhammad Akbar  (Hindi:   ,  Persian:   ? –  Jalal ud-Din Mu? ammad Akbar), also known as  Shahanshah  Akbar-e-Azam (14 October 1542   Ã¢â‚¬â€œ 27 October 1605),[4][5]  was the third  Mughal Emperor. He was of  Timurid  descent; the son of Emperor  Humayun, and the grandson of the Mughal Emperor Zaheeruddin Muhammad  Babur, the ruler who founded the Mughal dynasty in India. At the end of his reign in 1605 the Mughal empire covered most of northern and central India.He is most appreciated for having a liberal outlook on all faiths and beliefs and during his era, culture and art reached a zenith as compared to his predecessors. Akbar was 13 years old when he ascended the Mughal throne in  Delhi  (February 1556), following the death of his father Humayun. [6]During his reign, he eliminated military threats from the powerful  Pashtun  descendants of  Sher Shah Suri, and at the  Second Battle of Panipat  he deci sively defeated the newly self-declared Hindu king  Hemu. 7][8]  It took him nearly two more decades to consolidate his power and bring all the parts of northern and  central India  into his direct realm. He influenced the whole of the Indian Subcontinent as he ruled a greater part of it as an emperor. As an emperor, Akbar solidified his rule by pursuing diplomacy with the powerful  Hindu  Rajputcaste, and by marrying a Rajput princess. [7][9] Akbar's reign significantly influenced art and culture in the country. He was a great patron of art and architecture  [10]  He took a great interest in painting, and had the walls of his palaces adorned with  murals.Besides encouraging the development of the  Mughal school, he also patronised the European style of painting. He was fond of literature, and had several  Sanskrit  works translated into Persian and Persian scriptures translated in Sanskrit apart from getting many Persian works illustrated by painters from hi s court. [10]  During the early years of his reign, he showed intolerant attitude towards Hindus and other religions, but later exercised tolerance towards non-Islamic faiths by rolling back some of the strict  sharia  laws. 11][12][13]  His administration included numerous Hindu landlords, courtiers and military generals. He began a series of religious debates where  Muslim scholars  would debate religious matters with  Hindus,  Jains,Zoroastrians  and  Portuguese  Roman Catholic  Jesuits. He treated these religious leaders with great consideration, irrespective of their faith, and revered them. He not only granted lands and money for the mosques but the list of the recipients included a huge number Hindu temples in north and central India, Christian churches in Goa. Akbar the Great Abu'l-Fath Jalal-ud-Din Muhammad Akbar  (Hindi:   ,  Persian:   ? –  Jalal ud-Din Mu? ammad Akbar), also known as  Shahanshah  Akbar-e-Azam (14 October 1542   Ã¢â‚¬â€œ 27 October 1605),[4][5]  was the third  Mughal Emperor. He was of  Timurid  descent; the son of Emperor  Humayun, and the grandson of the Mughal Emperor Zaheeruddin Muhammad  Babur, the ruler who founded the Mughal dynasty in India. At the end of his reign in 1605 the Mughal empire covered most of northern and central India.He is most appreciated for having a liberal outlook on all faiths and beliefs and during his era, culture and art reached a zenith as compared to his predecessors. Akbar was 13 years old when he ascended the Mughal throne in  Delhi  (February 1556), following the death of his father Humayun. [6]During his reign, he eliminated military threats from the powerful  Pashtun  descendants of  Sher Shah Suri, and at the  Second Battle of Panipat  he deci sively defeated the newly self-declared Hindu king  Hemu. 7][8]  It took him nearly two more decades to consolidate his power and bring all the parts of northern and  central India  into his direct realm. He influenced the whole of the Indian Subcontinent as he ruled a greater part of it as an emperor. As an emperor, Akbar solidified his rule by pursuing diplomacy with the powerful  Hindu  Rajputcaste, and by marrying a Rajput princess. [7][9] Akbar's reign significantly influenced art and culture in the country. He was a great patron of art and architecture  [10]  He took a great interest in painting, and had the walls of his palaces adorned with  murals.Besides encouraging the development of the  Mughal school, he also patronised the European style of painting. He was fond of literature, and had several  Sanskrit  works translated into Persian and Persian scriptures translated in Sanskrit apart from getting many Persian works illustrated by painters from hi s court. [10]  During the early years of his reign, he showed intolerant attitude towards Hindus and other religions, but later exercised tolerance towards non-Islamic faiths by rolling back some of the strict  sharia  laws. 11][12][13]  His administration included numerous Hindu landlords, courtiers and military generals. He began a series of religious debates where  Muslim scholars  would debate religious matters with  Hindus,  Jains,Zoroastrians  and  Portuguese  Roman Catholic  Jesuits. He treated these religious leaders with great consideration, irrespective of their faith, and revered them. He not only granted lands and money for the mosques but the list of the recipients included a huge number Hindu temples in north and central India, Christian churches in Goa.

Analyzing Gender Roles in Billy Elliot Essay

During his first visit to The Bahamas and representing the Queen abroad for the Diamond Jubilee, Prince Harry addressed crowds of dignitaries and admirers in the capital, Nassau. The Island-hopping Prince Harry continues his 10-day Diamond Jubilee tour through the Caribbean in Jamaica this week after stops in Belize and the Bahamas over the weekend in honor of the Queen’s 60thyear on the throne. Proving to be a skilled diplomat with the common touch that characterized his late mother Princess Diana, Harry favored solo interviews with the local press and spent a great deal of time with the everyday people of the former British Honduras. The prince laid a wreath for British soldiers at Price Barracks in Belize City before departing the English-speaking Central American nation for the Bahamas. The young royal caused quite a stir in Nassau Sunday when he appeared in public for the first time ever in his crisp white ceremonial uniform, also known as the No. 1 Tropical Dress of the Blues and Royals. His uniform was punctuated with the first public reveal of the Diamond Jubilee medal. Throngs of fans lined the streets as Harry made his way to the Christ Church Cathedral to meet and greet. Though he mingled with several dignitaries in his special outfit, his encounter with Miss Bahamas, Anastagia Pierre, got tabloids buzzing. â€Å"I’m here to fall in love with Harry,† Pierre told reporters on Sunday. â€Å"He’s hot! He is single now so I would marry him, yes. † Harry brushed the comments aside and he seemed to truly enjoy himself in the Bahamas. In a speech he delivered a message from the Queen to the people of the Bahamas. Video1 Harry called at Government House in Nassau to pay his respects to the Governor General of the Bahamas and other members of the cabinet. The iconic pink-painted house is where his late great-great uncle the Duke of Windsor lived during the Second World War in his role as Governor General of the region. 3 Earlier in the day, Harry was meant to join the crew of a Royal Bahamian Defense Force patrol boat on a naval exercise but had to move to a media boat after the military vessel broke down. He eventually landed on tiny Harbor Island where he was greeted by crowds of tourists and locals. Harry will continue his Diamond Jubilee tour with a stop in Jamaica beginning Monday and end in Brazil where he will help launch a government trade mission in Rio.

Manifest Destiny in the United States - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 2 Words: 596 Downloads: 9 Date added: 2019/07/01 Category Society Essay Level High school Tags: Manifest Destiny Essay Did you like this example? Manifest Destiny was the belief that it was the United States destiny to expand west through North America. They believed God granted them the right to settle and defend this territory. Manifest Destiny, a phrase coined in 1845, expressed the philosophy that drove 19th-century U.S. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Manifest Destiny in the United States" essay for you Create order territorial expansion. (Manifest Destiny 2018). This belief was the basis for US annexation of western territories, some formerly being held by other countries as well as inhabited by Natives. The US did not care who or what was in its way, it was going to expand all the way west as was its destiny. Democrats endorsed manifest destiny, while opposing parties such as whigs opposed it. The US wanted this Southwest territory for a couple of reasons. One of these is that they needed more land for better opportunities for factories and trading. The US was expanding rapidly, but needed a better surplus of things to export. They looked to foreign trading but realized that everything needed was in the area west of the current US. The US also wanted to spread their civilization to other people, as to expand the American way of life. Another defining factor was that the open door policy was made, giving the US and China much opportunity for trade. To expand West was ideal for 19th century Americans, and they were determined to make it a reality. A few cultures were affected by manifest destiny. The white farmers were affected positively, as they now had millions more acres of land to settle and farm on. The farmers definitely benefited from manifest destiny. Another culture was greatly affected by this belief, although negatively, are the Native Americans. This was their home, land, and way of life that was at stake. As the white immigrants moved farther and farther west they took little mind to the Indians territories and pushed them out of their homes, relocating them to reservations that were supposed to be the Natives permanent homes from then on. If they did not leave, they would be entirely wiped out. This led to a mass amount of Indians dying out and entire tribes disappearing from existence. As the US continued to expand further west, Mexico had recently gained their independence. Mexico encouraged US citizens to settle in Texas territory and become Mexican citizens in order to gain more of a population to make it harder for the US to expand into Texas. This situation eventually backfired, as the settlers in Texas fought and won their independence. During the time of Texas being settled while still Mexican land, the US was becoming increasingly worried about the population arising in Texas. They feared that the outcome would be what Mexico wanted, and that they would not be able to annex Texas. Texas independence worked in favor of the US though, as they were able to annex it after 1 year. The border was still disputed by the US and Mexico because Mexico still had much of the land the US desired. As tensions grew, President Polk decided to provoke a war with Mexico in order to gain the land of Texas, New Mexico, and California. The belief of Manifest Destiny shaped what the US is today. If it wasnt for this, the US likely would have been a much smaller size than it is now. It provoked wars, but ultimately benefited in the US in the way our leaders had hoped. The US now had much more land to settle, farm, and industrialize on. Sources Manifest Destiny. History.com, AE Television Networks, 2018, www.history.com/topics/westward-expansion/manifest-destiny.