Myth and Physics

[treegod]

Apparently there are ways to test how realistic a myth is: Physics hints at historical truths in epics of old.

[DaRC]

It's interesting that they are using modelling techniques from social networks to map how realistic they are.

[treegod]

Yes, it's not how I'd reliably map my relationships, no sir.

[Explorer]

I never realised that myths had to be accurate, I thought they were more about conveying concepts and idea's?

[treegod]

I don't think they have to be accurate. I understand it as a search for what influences a myth. Is there a historical influence (individuals, places, events, etc.)? Or is it just human imagination? Or both? And if both, how much of each?

Interesting results; discovering the roots of myths is interesting, but, yeah, I'm more interested in the symbolic/metphorical aspect a la James Campbell.

[DaRC]

Dictionary.com comes up with this

Legend, fable, myth refer to fictitious stories, usually handed down by tradition (although some fables are modern). Legend, originally denoting a story concerning the life of a saint, is applied to any fictitious story, sometimes involving the supernatural, and usually concerned with a real person, place, or other subject: the legend of the Holy Grail. A fable is specifically a fictitious story (often with animals or inanimate things as speakers or actors) designed to teach a moral: a fable about industrious bees. A myth is one of a class of stories, usually concerning gods, semidivine heroes, etc., current since primitive times, the purpose of which is to attempt to explain some belief or natural phenomenon: the Greek myth about Demeter.

However, the accuracy of myth's, specifically those of the pre-christian northern tribes, is important. Classical christian thought in the past had denigrated their value such that, particularly the Celtic, were thought more akin to Fable than Myth.

Modern Linguistic and other scientific study is suggesting that whilst not accurate they are rooted in truth. This has wider impacts even suggesting that the Irish Book of Invasions (Leabhar Gabhála Éireann) could be more accurate than more modern scientific thought.

[DJ Droood]

Modern Linguistic and other scientific study is suggesting that whilst not accurate they are rooted in truth.

A couple of years ago, there were stories in the news about a DNA study that discovered a sizeable portion of the male population of Ireland was descended from Niall of the Nine Hostages.

http://www.slavens.net/dna/niall_results.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/18/science/18irish.html


Troy also springs to mind.

[kukl]

I think that we often think that the distant past is so far away that we take its tales with a pinch of salt. Sometimes a story emerges which shows how brief human history really is. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/there ... 71817.html

[Al Hakim]

I am sorry but the introductory text just gave evidence to the obvious. It is fairly known that fairy tales and myths can be based on some true incidents or old behaviour. The problem of the humanities is to extract that true "pinch of salt" and to tell the difference between it and later additional fiction.

[Dathi]

Hah, Treegod.

That study cited in your first post looks like sociology to me. And everyone knows that is not real science


For really interesting correlations between science (Physics) and myth, you need to look at dendrochronology. There is some really interesting and plausable stuff coming from Mike Baillie et al.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Baillie

http://www.amazon.com/The-Celtic-Gods-C ... 0752434446

http://www.catastrophism.com/intro/sear ... chronolog*

Dathi

[treegod]

I suppose it is sociology. Maybe, one day, a sociology paper will be published and have all the hallmarks of good scientific theory/experiment. Until then people are going to remain an ambiguous subject, lol.

Interesting links.