Myth

mythological consciousness · creative mythology

Citation packet

What does Myth mean in Seba's concordance?

Myth gives collective form to archetypal processes, carrying psychic patterns through image, narrative, ritual, and culture rather than abstract theory alone.

The page draws from 19 source passages, including Hillman, James, Campbell, Joseph, Noel, Daniel C..

Seba places Myth near related terms such as Archetype, Collective Unconscious, Hero.

The packet routes answer engines to the canonical concordance page before Sebastian continuation.

What does Myth mean in depth psychology?How does Seba define Myth?Which sources does Seba use for Myth?How does Myth relate to Archetype?How is Myth different from Collective Unconscious?Why does Myth matter for Hero?
Continue with Sebastian
SourceSourceSource

Within the depth-psychology corpus, ‘myth’ occupies a position simultaneously foundational and contested. For Jung and his immediate circle — Neumann, von Franz, Kerényi — myth functions as the primary idiom through which the collective unconscious externalizes itself: myths are not primitive errors but structured expressions of archetypal processes, continuous with dreams and operating at the level of entire cultures. Neumann traces the ego’s developmental stages through mythological projections; Kerényi proposes mythology as ‘collective psychology’ externalized in images. Hillman radicalizes this inheritance: in archetypal psychology, myth is not merely background explanation but the very substance of psychic reality — to ‘enter myths’ is to recognize concrete existence as metaphorical enactment. Campbell introduces a functionalist register, insisting myth is irreducibly social (‘the society’s dream’) and must be distinguished from mere story by its capacity to induce transformative intentionality in a community. Giegerich, by contrast, mounts the most rigorous critique: he argues that what archetypal psychology calls ‘myth’ has been positivized and abstracted, that genuine mythological consciousness belongs to a superseded historical stage of the soul, and that the nostalgic recycling of mythic figures cannot reach modernity’s actual predicaments. Vernant, approaching from classical studies, treats myth as a social-intellectual instrument that encodes moral and cosmological distinctions specific to Greek civic life. The central tension running through all these positions is whether myth names a perennial psychological structure or a historically bounded form of consciousness.

In the library 19 passages

If myths are the traditional narratives of the interaction of Gods and humans, a dramatic account ‘of the deeds of the daimones,’ then our way of finding Gods in our concrete lives is by entering myths, for that is where they are.

Hillman argues that mythical consciousness dissolves the need for the ‘as-if’ qualifier because entering myths means recognizing concrete existence itself as mythic enactment, making myth the operative mode of psychic life rather than its metaphoric description.

Hillman, James, Re-Visioning Psychology, 1975thesis

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

A story entertains one’s mind and fills one’s time; a myth touches one’s heart and enriches one’s life… a myth is the society’s dream. The myth is the public dream and the dream is the private myth.

Campbell draws a sharp functional distinction between story and myth, defining myth as an irreducibly social phenomenon that transforms the community as dream transforms the individual.

Campbell, Joseph, The Power of Myth, 1988thesis

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

Myths can lose that power and become only stories. In ancient Greece, the stories about Zeus and the Olympian gods had the power of myth in Homeric times, but by the time of Plato and Aristotle they had ceased to evoke concern among the majority of people; they had become mythology rather than myth.

Noel, explicating Campbell, articulates the historical contingency of mythic power: myths are not eternally operative but can calcify into mere cultural artifacts once their capacity to induce transformative intentionality is exhausted.

Noel, Daniel C., Paths to the Power of Myth: Joseph Campbell and the Study of Religion, 1990supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

The archetypes appear in myths and fairytales just as they do in dreams and in the products of psychotic fantasy… the myth deals with traditional forms of incalculable age. They hark back to a prehistoric world whose spiritual preconceptions and general conditions we can still observe today among existing primitives.

Jung establishes myths as the culturally ordered medium in which archetypes appear, structurally continuous with dreams but embedded in collective tradition rather than individual unconscious process.

Jung, Carl Gustav, The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious, 1959thesis

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

Psychopathology is so real and so true, the fantasy of illness so necessary, that only something equal to its strange reality and strange truth can provide adequate background… mythology presents pathology; pathology, mythology.

Hillman proposes myth and psychopathology as mutually constitutive registers, arguing that each requires the other for adequate comprehension and that mythology is not entertainment but the proper ground of psychological suffering.

Hillman, James, The Myth of Analysis: Three Essays in Archetypal Psychology, 1972thesis

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

With alchemy, the history of the soul has entered a stage with which the stage of mythology is once and for all superseded… in the stage of mythology man was surrounded on all sides, as it were, by mythological reality.

Giegerich argues that mythological consciousness represents a historically superseded stage of the soul’s development, one that alchemy already sublated, making any return to myth in depth psychology an anachronism.

thesis

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

Reduced intensity of consciousness and absence of concentration and attention, Janet’s abaissement du niveau mental, correspond pretty exactly to the primitive state of consciousness in which, we must suppose, myths were originally formed.

Jung proposes a formal homology between the psychological condition of reduced conscious intensity and the mental state in which myths were originally generated, grounding mythic formation in a specific mode of consciousness.

Jung, Carl Gustav, The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious, 1959supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

This mythology will itself have the same effect as the most direct psychology — the effect, indeed, of an activity of the psyche externalised in images… any great mythology might — if one chose to ignore its artistic aspects — be styled a ‘collective psychology’.

Kerényi grounds the equivalence of mythology and psychology in the directness of their image-production, proposing that great mythological systems function as collective psychological self-articulation.

Kerényi, Karl, The Gods of the Greeks, 1951thesis

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

What is really at work in the case is myth; what is really going on in family is myth… Freud ennobled family with a mythical dimension, for his pathologized view was at the same time a mythologized view, confirming once more the root metaphor of depth psychology: mythology presents pathology; pathology, mythology.

Hillman reads Freud’s psychoanalytic project as an unwitting epistrophe — a return of the human world to mythological ground — that simultaneously pathologized and mythologized the domestic sphere.

Hillman, James, A Blue Fire: The Essential James Hillman, 1989supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

Inasmuch as what goes under the name of myths does not refer to real myths and real Gods, they do not truly reach our afflictions… let alone our modern situation at large nor many of the great cultural phenomena and predicaments of our time.

Giegerich indicts archetypal psychology’s invocation of myth as a positivized abstraction incapable of genuinely engaging modern afflictions or cultural realities, arguing it amounts to nostalgic game-playing.

thesis

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

Myths, for example, are distorted vestiges of the wish-phantasies of whole nations — the age-long dreams of youthful humanity… Rank regards myth as the collective dream of a whole people.

Jung surveys the psychoanalytic tradition’s alignment of myth with collective dream-work, situating his own archetypal reading as a development of — rather than departure from — Freud’s and Rank’s foundational formulations.

Jung, Carl Gustav, Symbols of Transformation, 1952supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

We have traced the development of this ego complex in mythology, and in so doing have familiarized ourselves with part of the history of consciousness in its mythological projection. The developmental changes in the relation between the ego and the unconscious were expressed mythologically in the different archetypal figures.

Neumann treats mythology as the primary archive of the history of consciousness, reading mythic figures — uroboros, Great Mother, dragon, hero — as projections of successive stages in the ego’s developmental transformation.

Neumann, Erich, The Origins and History of Consciousness (Princeton, 2019supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

The mythical world of his ancestors — for instance, the aljira or bugari of the Australian aborigines — is a reality equal if not superior to the material world. It is not the world as we know it that speaks out of his unconscious, but the unknown world of the psyche.

Jung and Kerényi establish that for mythologically immersed consciousness, mythic reality carries ontological weight equal to or exceeding empirical reality, because it voices the unknown psychic world rather than the known material one.

Jung, C. G. and Kerényi, C., Essays on a Science of Mythology: The Myth of the Divine Child and the Mysteries of Eleusis, 1949supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

Civilization requires a hero myth — in fact, is built upon that myth. Though the hero himself is nonexistent, a figure of legend, of another age past and dead… The dead hero is thus never dead but lives on as the ideals and virtues of civilization.

Hillman argues that civilization is structurally dependent upon the hero myth as an imaginative foundation, with the dead hero subsisting as the animating ideals of public life rather than as historical fact.

Hillman, James, Mythic Figures, 2007supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

Freud ennobled family with a mythical dimension, for his pathologized view was at the same time a mythologized view… The infusion of Greek myth into the medical, academic, commercial, and often Jewish Vienna of the 1890s brought to family a transparency beyond bourgeois materialism.

Hillman argues that Freud’s pathologizing gaze simultaneously mythologized the bourgeois family, bestowing upon it a depth of psychic transparency that secular materialism alone could never provide.

Hillman, James, Mythic Figures, 2007supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

The myth speaks for itself: Through the will of Zeus, who, in order to avenge the theft of fire, has hidden man’s livelihood from him, the human race is condemned to toil. Man is obliged to accept this harsh divine law.

Vernant reads Hesiodic myth as a self-sufficient moral-cosmological argument, encoding social instruction about justice and hubris within narrative rather than in explicit philosophical proposition.

Vernant, Jean-Pierre, Myth and Thought Among the Greeks, 1983supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

Zeus fights for sovereignty against Typhon, the dragon with a thousand voices, the power of confusion and disorder… The royal trial and victory, which are ritually mimed in a struggle against a dragon, stand for the recreation of the cosmic, seasonal, and social order.

Vernant situates Greek cosmogonic myth within the structural logic of royal ritual, demonstrating how myth encodes the periodic re-establishment of cosmic and political order through the king’s symbolic combat.

Vernant, Jean-Pierre, Myth and Thought Among the Greeks, 1983supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

The mind and feelings being imprinted simultaneously with a correlative mythology. And not nature, but society, is the alpha and omega of this lesson.

Campbell’s ‘Creative Mythology’ insists that ritual bodily marking and the imprinting of mythology are simultaneous social operations, making mythology the cognitive-affective counterpart to the cultural inscription of the body.

Campbell, Joseph, Creative Mythology: The Masks of God, Volume IV, 1968supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

The stories that myths tell cannot be documented in histories; the gods and goddesses, and the heroes and their enemies, are told about in stories inscribed in clay and carved in sta[ues].

Hillman marks the ontological register of myth as categorically distinct from historical documentation, locating its truth in imaginal narrative rather than archival fact.

Hillman, James, The Soul’s Code: In Search of Character and Calling, 1996aside

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

Related terms