Why theory is not myth

James Cresswell provides a thoughtful critique of my essay on a theory of myth (Mills) with a specific focus on the nature of theorizing that challenges the dogma of empirical frames of reference, concluding that scientific theories themselves are contemporary myths. Insofar as myth is an attempt to provide a narrative or discourse about phenomena, Cresswell's argument could apply to any theory. But he takes this point further: theory is synonymous with myth. In order to unpack this evocative claim, it may prove useful to revisit how theory and myth relate to the concepts of logos, truth, ontology and identity. In the end, I suggest theory is not myth because theory sets out to describe, interpret and explain phenomena and is scrutinized for its validity, generalizability and applied consequences, while the premises of myth are often historically and culturally presupposed or simply devolve into belief that may or may not be defensible

Aesthetics · Argument (complex analysis · Epistemology · Generalizability theory · Identity (music · Linguistics · Logos Bible Software · Mythology · Narrative · Sociology · Embodied and Extended Cognition · Philosophy · Philosophy and History of Science · Psychology · Social Representations and Identity

• Unconscious Abyss, The

  Jon Mills•Unconscious Abyss, The•2002

  Añadir item

• Commentary on Mills’ “toward a theory of myth”

  Open Access•Robert A Segal•Journal for the Theory of Social…•2020

  Añadir item

• Theories as modern myths

  Open Access•James Cresswell•Journal for the Theory of Social…•2020

  Añadir item

• Toward a theory of myth

  Open Access•Jon Mills•Journal for the Theory of Social…•2020

  Añadir item