Joseph Campbell is awful

Joseph Campbell is like anything else I read or listen too or watch. I take the things that are useful and discard the rest.

PaschalVehicle wrote: Trisskar: I don't disagree. The Power of Myth as a book is, indeed, just a transcript of an interview; and interviews are frequently not consistent, coherent, or enlightening by their very nature. It is frustrating however to have *required reading* for a program be, as I said and continue to emphasise, inconsistent at best and incoherent at worst. Perhaps I'm just reliving my own personal hell of Catcher in the Rye in high school. As for my priorities, Point A is the IP and Point B is admission into the Seminary, for a variety of reasons that have a great deal to do with my own personal idiosyncrasies, and that is certainly a goal for which I will tolerate fields and valleys of flowers. So dislike Campbell or not I'll still keep reading him and journaling.

Completely agree. I feel the temple should only focus on the Hero's Journey and it's incorporation towards the Jedi Path....the rest is just "Stuff & Nonsense" as Alan Watt's likes to say

Vusuki wrote: So can you give some clear examples where a myth or story doesn't fit Campbell's idea of the Hero's Journey? I'm very interested in testing if it is possible to use the theory on any myth or whether I have to accord only a specific fragment of the model to the myth you give...

I don't believe all myths tell part of a whole story. There are many myth paradigms and Campbell's is only one form. He does conveniently ignore anything that does not fit his narrative. The Heroine for example. He considers the female roles in myth as a prize for the hero. According to Campbell there is no such thing as Heroine and females cannot have their own story without being intertwined with his version of "Hero". There are several other versions as well, including the anti hero story and the Homeric hero story, none of which follow the cycle that Campbell describes.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: The Heroine for example. He considers the female roles in myth as a prize for the hero.

This is understandable and ligitimate. Back in the day and in most myths that is the role of a female. It is rare upon rare to have a female hero, it is only just recently that female hero's are so pushed for popularity these days. And the hero's journey monomyth as it is now is easily used and followed by our female heros.

There are several other versions as well, including the anti hero story

Has nothing to do with being a Jedi or a hero of virtue.... sooooo....not relevant...therefor no reason to mention it

and the Homeric hero story, none of which follow the cycle that Campbell describes.

seems to follow the heros journey just fine from my reading

First, the interviews and even The Power of Myth are more Cliff Note versions of Hero With a Thousand Faces. Just like any other academic, if we're going to judge the work, we have to judge it in its entirety. There are certainly big leaps taken by Campbell and he does try to shoehorn certain myths into his model, but we also have to consider the time during which his research was conducted and resources he had available to him. At the time he was doing it, he was one of the very few who had attempted to find similarity between a vast number of myths worldwide from various cultures. And he didn't have the benefit of the internet, or even computers for that matter. And most ancient mythology did feature male heroes. And there are translation issues. And, and, and...

When I consider his work in this light, I see it laying a foundation that we can use to further his study of mythology and perhaps expand upon it. Or we may eventually demonstrate that the Hero's Journey is inherently flawed. What I have been unable to deny is that his model does fit a lot of modern mythology including those featuring female heroes. Disney has especially embraced this, as far back ad Belle in Beauty and the Beast and the recent backstory of Maleficent. We see it in The Matrix. It shows up in the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings. Harry Potter and The Karate Kid follow the script pretty closely. It doesn't need to be dismissed offhand just because it has Campbell's name on it.

The reason I see value in including it in the IP is that we call ourselves Jedi and look to the fictional characters and the philosophy/mythology that influenced their creation. George Lucas has specifically mentioned numerous times that the story arc of Luke Skywalker is definitely influenced by the Hero's Journey model. He admits to borrowing from existing mythology from multiple cultures to create his Star Wars universe. To explore the theological and mythological influences of Star Wars without including Campbell would be like studying Aristotle while ignoring Plato and Socrates. We don't have to agree with Campbell, but we should not deny his role in influencing modern mythology, especially the cinema.

Trisskar wrote: This is understandable and ligitimate. Back in the day and in most myths that is the role of a female. It is rare upon rare to have a female hero, it is only just recently that female hero's are so pushed for popularity these days. And the hero's journey monomyth as it is now is easily used and followed by our female heros.

Actually there are a myriad of ancient heroine and strong female lead character myths. In fact it was the norm before Patriarchal warrior clans destroyed much of the ancient stories and practices by replacing them or modifying them with male figures. However many survived. There are tons of ancient heroine stories of the Goddesses like Artemis, Tiamat, Hel, Bastet, White Buffalo Calf Woman, Freya. Also there were the Amazons, Lilith, Eve, Atalanta, Hua Mulan, The Valkyrie - even real life figures like Joan of Arc of which legend has formed around. The list goes on and many of these legendary heroines have been downplayed over the centuries because of emphasis on male counterparts.

Trisskar wrote: Has nothing to do with being a Jedi or a hero of virtue.... sooooo....not relevant...therefor no reason to mention it

I never said it did and this is not a discussion on Jediism but a discussion on the heroes journey so I do find it relevant.

Trisskar wrote: seems to follow the heros journey just fine from my reading

Then your reading it wrong.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote:

Trisskar wrote: This is understandable and ligitimate. Back in the day and in most myths that is the role of a female. It is rare upon rare to have a female hero, it is only just recently that female hero's are so pushed for popularity these days. And the hero's journey monomyth as it is now is easily used and followed by our female heros.

Actually there are a myriad of ancient heroine and strong female lead character myths. In fact it was the norm before Patriarchal warrior clans destroyed much of the ancient stories and practices by replacing them or modifying them with male figures. However many survived. There are tons of ancient heroine stories of the Goddesses like Artemis, Tiamat, Hel, Bastet, White Buffalo Calf Woman, Freya. Also there were the Amazons, Lilith, Eve, Atalanta, Hua Mulan, The Valkyrie - even real life figures like Joan of Arc of which legend has formed around. The list goes on and many of these legendary heroines have been downplayed over the centuries because of emphasis on male counterparts.

And every single one of them follows the Heros Journey format. And nearly all of them are in the "New" ages save one or two of which are the rare cases i spoke of

Okay, try not to be offended, I'm not going to offer you "niceties" like the others, but instead offer you my honesty on your statement, with all the kindness possible for addressing such a disrespectful rant.

If you are having difficulties with the IP material, it is probably best you consult with the clergy or another member INSTEAD of opting to just publically disrespect the core philosophy source for the Temple right in the middle of its "online hallowed halls".

You do understand that your tirade complaining that you hate Campbell in the TOTJO IP is like entering Christian seminary and then complaining that you don't like JC in the Bible?

The idea of The Force originates with the concepts of the "i" Campbell as experienced through the "i" Lucas. If the "i" you are being this time around doesn't like it, then don't do it and go find something else that "i" as you this time around does like. Simple as can be.

From my reading of your rant, it seems to me that you are having issues with self and simply cannot get past ego while trying to complete this portion of the IP, since all you've listed is what is offensive to you personally...as if the Temple of the Jedi Order Initiate Programme was here just to suit you personally.

Pardon me, "i" have to go laugh with "I" and IT for a moment.

As a retired college instructor "i" will leave you with this advice: If you don't like the studies THAT YOU YOURSELF SIGNED ON FOR either try harder to understand what is blocking YOU or find something else to study. Lengthy manifestos on why you hate your homework are childish and don't have ANY place in ANY learning environment beyond first grade.

As your peer in the IP "i" will remind you of the 21 Maxims and that "A Jedi is unencumbered by bias or personal interest." and your rant is filled with nothing but bias and personal interest.

But the i/I/IT will just continue to laugh because your error here is equally entertaining as it is irritating because it was done in complete ignore-ance of anything other than yourself as just another "i" offshoot of the big "I" of "we" and you've missed the whole point in the first place.

Campbell is the core because his monomyth is THE thing that brings together ALL the religions under one roof for discussion of their similarities instead of their differences. That you managed to bring "difference" that is somehow also "offended" to this all is utterly amazing AND a true testimony to the ego of humanity and its blindness to reality which the IP and Jedism are intended to correct...

...and i/I/IT finds this to be hilarious.

May The Force be with you. If you don't conquer ego soon you're gonna really need it whence you arrive upon the lessons of Watts.

Trisskar wrote:
And every single one of them follows the Heros Journey format. And nearly all of them are in the "New" ages save one or two of which are the rare cases i spoke of

No they dont. While some may have elements of it many do not. LOL what are you calling "new" ages? How are the heros journey ages before many of these? In fact many of the heroine stories are way before more commonly known hero stories.

Awesome topic. I enjoyed Campbell and really dislike Watts, but my personal reactions to them are moot. The reason i feel neither of them deserve a central place in the IP (which is related to why i chose not to pursue the IP for my own develpment) is that at the end of going through all that they offer id say the best assessment of their work is "SO WHAT?!"

People need to know how to take proper care of themselves (in all the ways this can imply) and how to develop and maintain healthy relationships with their families, lovers, friends, coworkers, neighbors, and communities. We need help deciding what to do with our lives, in the practical sense. We have to know how to develop our sense of self respect, how to choose our careers or roles in life, how to cultivate courage so we can choose to do the right thing when there are immediate personal consequences for it. How to stand up for ourselves when we're faced when someone pushes us around and how to interact with people without taking everything as a personal insult. And a thousand other, real life difficulties that I feel that JC and Watts fail to offer any (or lets say "enough") direct practical insight into.

---

steamboat28 wrote: Campbell's not awful, he's just wrong. Just like Freud and Darwin were wildly mistaken, but what they got right still laid foundations for the next waves of research.

I dont wish to derail this topic but i cant help but reply to this.... ive never encountered anyone (who was scientifically credible) who said Darwin was "wildly mistaken". Could you elaborate on this or point me in the right direction? My understanding is that evolution, adaptation, and natural and sexual selection are still the bedrock explanations for the development and diversity of earth based life?

OB1Shinobi wrote:

steamboat28 wrote: Campbell's not awful, he's just wrong. Just like Freud and Darwin were wildly mistaken, but what they got right still laid foundations for the next waves of research.

I dont wish to derail this topic but i cant help but reply to this.... ive never encountered anyone (who was scientifically credible) who said Darwin was "wildly mistaken". Could you elaborate on this or point me in the right direction? My understanding is that evolution, adaptation, and natural and sexual selection are still the bedrock explanations for the development and diversity of earth based life?

Oh Im so glad you said it because I was dying to but found the restraint somewhere, somehow!! lol. I am curious as well!

I'm going to come back to this with a more detailed reply, as this prompted a lot more discussion than I anticipated (which is delightful), but I'd just like to note that the tone of the thread is starting to get a little.., combative; and I left my lightsaber at home. Kindness and butterflies folks, kindness and butterflies.

OBI1Shinobi - That is being an adult. I definitely see a need for it, but teaching "Life101" wasn't what I was looking for when I came here....

PaschalVehicle wrote: I'm going to come back to this with a more detailed reply, as this prompted a lot more discussion than I anticipated (which is delightful), but I'd just like to note that the tone of the thread is starting to get a little.., combative; and I left my lightsaber at home. Kindness and butterflies folks, kindness and butterflies.

Dont let Debra discourage you. Unlike a Christian church this is a place of open and honest discussion where you have every right to criticize anything you feel is in error as much as you like. I did not consider your comments a rant but an introduction to a potentially very interesting discussion!

rugadd wrote: OBI1Shinobi - That is being an adult. I definitely see a need for it, but teaching "Life101" wasn't what I was looking for when I came here....

Well i suppose im walking right into it but ok, I'll bite: what were you looking for when you originally came here? And for that matter, what do you feel this place is supposed to offer?

OB1Shinobi wrote:

rugadd wrote: OBI1Shinobi - That is being an adult. I definitely see a need for it, but teaching "Life101" wasn't what I was looking for when I came here....

Well i suppose im walking right into it but ok, I'll bite: what were you looking for?

I can't speak for others, but for me, I was looking for something that might help me discover the meaning behind all of those things you mentioned. I have a family and a lover and a career, but why? What is the purpose behind getting up each morning and cultivating these relationships and completing these adult tasks? I had gotten very good at completing the tasks put before me as I was supposed to do as an adult, but I was left with a somewhat empty feeling. I have money and stuff, but to what end? I needed spirituality in my life, and I've found that here.

I'm not going to lie, being told I might die of cancer soon also motivated me to search for a deeper meaning to life beside surviving and getting promoted at work.

Perhaps the most valuable result of all education is the ability to make yourself do the thing you have to do, when it ought to be done, whether you like it or not; it is the first lesson that ought to be learned; and however early a man's training begins, it is probably the last lesson that he learns thoroughly. ~ Thomas H. Huxley, English biologist (1825 - 1895)

rugadd wrote: Joseph Campbell is like anything else I read or listen too or watch. I take the things that are useful and discard the rest.

Yup, that's how I approach it, too.

I'm doing a book club with my sister and she chose Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis. She knows I'm not a Christian like her but I was glad to read the book even if I still disagreed with the religion/theology he was teaching.

I feel I gained a lot in the process even if it was only to sharpen my mind on why I detracted. But that wasn't the only benefit. There are principles that he eloquently taught that I believe will stand the test of time as I feel they are pragmatic to our species.

Back to the topic at hand, I think even though you really disagree with Campbell, a merit of his would be the people he inspired and what they created with that inspiration.

That's pretty cool in itself just as a history lesson

I came here looking for answers. The problem was I did not know the questions. I think that anyone that truly comes here and is honest in their pursuit and is willing to endure the pain of sweeping away fluffy preconceptions and cognitive bias comes to this same conclusion. Asking themselves "what is the question"?

When one can strip all the shit away and lay themselves bare before themselves in ultimate honesty anything Campbell or watts or this temple's doctrine has to say becomes meaningless. Each piece becomes but a sliver in an endless sea of slivers embedded into an infinate haystack. To pick any one of them up and arrogantly declair "This is it!" "This is truth"! Has missed the point of the haystack and that's one of the saddest experiences any human could ever undergo. It makes my spirit weep in sorrow to see people in that state.

But if we don't also pick up each sliver in Campbell and watts and and many others and spend a moment studying them then we have missed the point once again. We will never comprehend the haystack but if we give up trying we are just as lost.

I have come to a place where I'm no longer even sure if there is a question or even if i possess any sort of free will at all. It's up to each of us to take this journey as deep as you want to take it. I feel sorry for those that stop at one sliver and declair this is truth just as much as I feel sorry for those that ignore the sliver and declair there is no wisdom there for me to discover.

So I implore each of you to pick up any sliver presented and study it. It may prick you and it may soothe you, it doesn't matter, what matters is the experience of it. And through that experience we build our own splinter to add to the pile.

To read, to listen, to learn, to discover or realize things from a source of information, is it really ever about simply agreeing or disagreeing with it? I think if I blindly agreed with Campbell or Watts just the same as if I were out to simply debunk things with what I believed I know better about, I would have been wasting my own time. To "learn how to learn", as paradoxical as it may sound, I feel is an important ability to develop. Knowing how to interact with any source beyond one's agreements and disagreements, I've always felt is imperative when it concerns philosophy.