A myth is a metaphor for human behavior, culture, wisdom, and knowledge (Nagy 15). It is fitting that whether its subject is the acts of deities or other extraordinary events, a myth always takes us back to the beginnings of all things. However, you also mention that there is no single definition on which not all experts would concur or give the same weight. While three modes of religious expression – holy speech, sacred acts, and sacred locations—are used by myth, the fact that myths are composed of words can draw immediate attention.
Each of the sciences and academic fields can only offer solutions in compliance with its own formulation of problems, just like the computer, whose output is structurally dependent upon the queries asked. For example, religious historians’ semantic issue goes beyond simple linguistics (Chartash 315). Whatever the concept of religion, it must somehow relate to the entirety of human orientation, and by extension, to the fundamental beliefs or presumptions behind each specific endeavor or creation. The study of religious texts from human tradition rather than a philosophical reflection on the foundations of logically sound and rationally justified thought and conduct is how the historiography of religions should approach such totality. Hence, not “What is truthful?” but instead, “What have cultures, civilizations, and communities felt compelled to point to and retain as true?” constitutes the primary concern.
One of the perspectives focuses on the diversity of cultures, languages, and manufacturing methods. This variety encourages to search for a myth’s explanation of the uniqueness of each culture, and undoubtedly, many questions can be answered in this way. The biggest methodological blunder would be to disregard a tradition’s unique characteristics. Given this, it is crucial to remember that, by definition, myth highlights facts and occasions from the creation and establishment of the universe. This poses a particular challenge that is just beneath the surface. Although numerous myths from various civilizations and eras make up the world, “the world” implies unity.
One more perspective concerns power as a critical idea in politics studies. I agree that it often remains a rather abstract issue. Power wielders are not that element’s sterile laboratory test tubes. Political influence over others often involves the use of mythical and religious components, and since the eighteenth century, ideological views that support and reject religious elements have grown steadily. Like power, religion and mythology always exist in mixtures rather than perfect purity.
Last, some perspectives view “humor” as a universal element in all myths. This has nothing to do with humor, wit, or even the desire to make people laugh out loud. It resembles just what German Romantic writers, fascinated by the feeling of humor, may have meant when they said that a smile might set us free from worries, particularly from the doldrums of life. Liberation is an appropriate phrase to describe what is intended since, if successful, myths must penetrate a wall built for our regular comprehension because they aim to accomplish what conventional speech cannot. This perspective is closer to my viewpoints than all others since I adhere to the idea that humor is what liberates and simplifies human life.
Works Cited
Chartash, David. “Maths Meets Myths: Quantitative Approaches to Ancient Narratives.” Folklore, vol. 130, no. 3, 2019, pp. 315–317.
Nagy, Peter, et al. “Facing the Pariah of Science: The Frankenstein myth as a social and ethical reference for scientists.” Science and engineering ethics 26.2 (2020): 737-759.