Analytic reading of myths

[Anonymous No.11829154]

>myths are reducible to concepts
>reductio ad absurdo circulus totas

[Anonymous No.11829157]

Stupid frogposter

[Anonymous No.11829164]

>>11829157
>t. sexjunk god

[Anonymous No.11829168]

Who does analytic readings of myths? Please enlighten me.

[Anonymous No.11829506]

>>11829168

[Anonymous No.11829535]

its becuase the most salient element of a story are birthed from the vicious cycles we act our everyday.
its supposed to be circular

[Anonymous No.11829643]

>>11829168
Jordan Peterson probably. He does analyses on Disney movies and they're fucking awful. Idk how anyone can watch them and still take him seriously

[Anonymous No.11829861]

>>11829168
Basically anyone in the modern era. I hardly read anything where the entire meaning of the myth isn't bastardised and secularised.

This explains it further, (NuMods, please don't delete, it is relevant to discussion.)
"Science is the extricate of language. And if "language is the house of the Truth of Being," then the house is also that clearing which has already divided us from nature—and therefore Being.

Only mythic formulations of words can think such things. Nature is the fulcrum of our difference, and science attempts to realise this fulcrum through an extrication of nature into its materiality at every point. Hence its total misunderstanding, and destructive essence, to the point that it becomes an ouroboros.

All of the great technologies of our time even have this form enmeshed within their function, suggesting the extent to which science remains within the dominion of sacrifice to an unknown. And yet its rites are entirely sentient within the desecration of their ends: being doomed.

Science/capital is the loss of sentience, the funeral procession of language. Hence why it's art is post-ironic shit."

[Anonymous No.11829866]

>>11829535
>my daily life is cosmology
Sorry, but no.