Ouroboros Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 I couldn't vote in this poll, either. I don't think Campbell was a phenomenal genius, but neither do I think he was "just OK" - he was simply a scholar, immersed and well-versed in a topic about which he was passionate. Exactly. He's not a person to adore and lift up as some new Christ, Savior of mankind, nor is he worthy of despise and rejection. He did spend his whole life investigating myths and religions, so he would know something about it, at least something more than most of us. I find it hard to even think to call him a poser... If I recall correctly, he was a friggin professor in the subject! I never heard of a 10+ years study (or whatever it took) in posery? It'd be like calling Hawking a poser in theoretical physics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted February 29, 2008 Super Moderator Share Posted February 29, 2008 With all the people out there feeding us lies and fighting against rationality I am surprised to find a rant against Campbell. He exposed a lot of people to the ideas of comparative religion and how myth reflects Man's qualities, and thus is similar throughout history and location - violence and all. I think he reached many who might otherwise have never seen the view outside their own tiny worlds. It was higher education brought to the masses. - Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sophronia Posted February 29, 2008 Author Share Posted February 29, 2008 Sophronia...did you deem that Campbell was promoting violence in the interview you saw? Did you feel that his enthusiasm bordered on condoning the acts he was describing? Exactly. I feel that his enthusiasm for the violence depicted did border on condoning it. Had he provided just a brief statement of something like "I do not condone human sacrifice nor do I recommend that such violent acts be re-enacted", I would not have such a major problem with this particular video. But he failed to give any indication that he saw violent human sacrifice as anything but glorious and wonderful. I am just wondering if you find violence in movies extremely distasteful, especially in the way that Hollywood very much can "glorify" it, and found Campbell's assertions to be in similar context... Yes, I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sophronia Posted February 29, 2008 Author Share Posted February 29, 2008 I couldn't vote in this poll, either. I don't think Campbell was a phenomenal genius, but neither do I think he was "just OK" - he was simply a scholar, immersed and well-versed in a topic about which he was passionate. Exactly. He's not a person to adore and lift up as some new Christ, Savior of mankind, nor is he worthy of despise and rejection. He did spend his whole life investigating myths and religions, so he would know something about it, at least something more than most of us. I find it hard to even think to call him a poser... If I recall correctly, he was a friggin professor in the subject! I never heard of a 10+ years study (or whatever it took) in posery? It'd be like calling Hawking a poser in theoretical physics. There are plenty of professors who are posers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sophronia Posted February 29, 2008 Author Share Posted February 29, 2008 With all the people out there feeding us lies and fighting against rationality I am surprised to find a rant against Campbell. He exposed a lot of people to the ideas of comparative religion and how myth reflects Man's qualities, and thus is similar throughout history and location - violence and all. I think he reached many who might otherwise have never seen the view outside their own tiny worlds. It was higher education brought to the masses. - Chris He presented his own theories on how he felt that myth reflects human qualities. He was by no means a scientist, nor do his theories qualify as facts. You are surprised to find a rant against him? Good. The unquestioning reverence he receives from so many is reason enough to dislike him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sophronia Posted February 29, 2008 Author Share Posted February 29, 2008 Wow. Can you please try to find that episode? This is interesting, and I want to see it myself. Please? You should go to the library and check out the entire series like I did. He really must have pissed on your breakfast cereal. Nope; I don't eat cereal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnacle Bill Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 All six episodes of the 1988 PBS series entitled "Joseph Campbell and The Power of Myth" are posted on Google Video. A search result link is HERE. Each episode is hosted by Bill Moyers and is approximately 1 hour in length. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 Wow. Can you please try to find that episode? This is interesting, and I want to see it myself. Please? You should go to the library and check out the entire series like I did. He really must have pissed on your breakfast cereal. Nope; I don't eat cereal. Look, please don't get so defensive. If the man condones and enjoys human sacrifice he deserves censure and criticism. I assume you are refering to the series of interviews "The Power of Myth". If so, I personally don't mind viewing every single episode again to try to make out what you are referring to. I am just puzzled because I know I watched it a couple of times on PBS and never came away with this impression. In fact, upon second viewing I became even more interested and then read a book he had written. He was a professor and seems to me to have been an expert on mythology, not some kind of guru asking for worship. I thought the series was interesting when I watched it, that's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 Wow. Can you please try to find that episode? This is interesting, and I want to see it myself. Please? You should go to the library and check out the entire series like I did. Which series was it? I watched the one with Moyer's interview at the Lucas Ranch years ago, but I don't remember anything of what you described... so I'm not sure it helps if I watch it again and try to evaluate how you would react to what he says. I also watched some other DVDs, but in none of them did I get the impression you did. So tell me, how can I find something in there that was offensive to you? I suggest you point it out instead, and then I can watch that particular part and see if maybe I was too callused to see it? He really must have pissed on your breakfast cereal. Nope; I don't eat cereal. It was figure of speech. (Interpretation: he must have really said something extremely awful to deserve the epithets you gave him.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 He really must have pissed on your breakfast cereal. Nope; I don't eat cereal. It would a appear a sense of humour was boycotted along with the products of Mr Kelloggs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 There are plenty of professors who are posers. True, but are the posers in their own particular field? Like a professor in geology is a poser in geology? I can understand it if a professor in biology pretends to be knowledgeable in astrophysics, and hence a poser as an astrophysicist, but Campbell was a serious professor in the exact same field he was talking about. That's not a poser?! Unless you define poser as something else than I do!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 It would a appear a sense of humour was boycotted along with the products of Mr Kelloggs... A cereal killer... (old joke... ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legion Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 He really must have pissed on your breakfast cereal. Nope; I don't eat cereal. It would a appear a sense of humour was boycotted along with the products of Mr Kelloggs... vote Obama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraphicsGuy Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 Sophronia...did you deem that Campbell was promoting violence in the interview you saw? Did you feel that his enthusiasm bordered on condoning the acts he was describing? Exactly. I feel that his enthusiasm for the violence depicted did border on condoning it. Had he provided just a brief statement of something like "I do not condone human sacrifice nor do I recommend that such violent acts be re-enacted", I would not have such a major problem with this particular video. But he failed to give any indication that he saw violent human sacrifice as anything but glorious and wonderful. I am just wondering if you find violence in movies extremely distasteful, especially in the way that Hollywood very much can "glorify" it, and found Campbell's assertions to be in similar context... Yes, I do. Ahh...okay, I understand what you're getting at then. And...uh...sitting down and watching "Robocop" with you would be out of the question then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 He presented his own theories on how he felt that myth reflects human qualities. Kind'a true. He actually built his theories of earlier, other theories of historians, researchers, textual critics, scholars... plenty of other, but he put it together that maybe wasn't done as clearly before. He was by no means a scientist, nor do his theories qualify as facts. True. And neither do any other researcher's theories about history. History is to a large part theories based on probabilities and values. You are surprised to find a rant against him? Good. The unquestioning reverence he receives from so many is reason enough to dislike him. It is? A person that is liked, must be hated, because he's liked by so many? Sorry, but that doesn't make sense. Is the reversed also true then? Someone that is hated by many, should be loved? (Should we go to the Godwin level?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The-Captain Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 Soph just curious, but is the bout of enthusiasm for the sacrifice motif your main (only?) reason for disliking Campbell so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 "Power Of Myth 4 - Sacrifice and Bliss" Would this be the offending article? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted March 1, 2008 Share Posted March 1, 2008 Okay. I jumped back and forth in that video. I've seen it before, but I didn't take the time right now to watch it all over again. I'm still not sure what's offensive? He just talks about myths about sacrifices... he's not talking about real sacrifices, but sacrifices of fictional characters. Stories, like ... made up stuff... fantasy... not real... right? Like "oh, my God, they killed Kenny!" stuff. Or do I miss something here? Maybe by skipping around in the video, I managed to miss it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted March 1, 2008 Share Posted March 1, 2008 Btw, Soph, you say "Thor" under "any gods", what's your stand on human sacrifice in the old Asatru? (And also, don't take my responses to you as criticism of your opinion. You have full right to hate whoever you want, I'm just taken aback a bit by the intensity of the repulsion you feel against a person most people don't even know about.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted March 1, 2008 Share Posted March 1, 2008 Shall I get out the pink flounce toaster? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted March 1, 2008 Share Posted March 1, 2008 I hope not. I still want to see what passage in the video that would make Hitler blush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Marty Posted March 1, 2008 Share Posted March 1, 2008 The level of dislike seems to be emotionaly based, and that usually means something personal has been touched. I can see why Campell would be disliked, but only from an emotional level. He threatens cherished beliefs as nothing special or unique, but universal. But as far as calling him a poser? That's a personal attack that can not be supported in reality. It's a defense tactic. I'm trying to see your point, Soph, but I just can't. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The-Captain Posted March 1, 2008 Share Posted March 1, 2008 Yeesh for some reason I keep thinking this thread is about Bruce Campbell. Now that would be an unreasonable dislike! I keep jumping in ready to pull some Bruce apologetics on the non-believers, now I'm disappointed again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted March 1, 2008 Share Posted March 1, 2008 Oh, he's one of the actors in Burn Notice. I like that show. It's funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legion Posted March 2, 2008 Share Posted March 2, 2008 Well, I finally got around to picking up Campbell. I have to say that I like him so far. I disagree with him about a few things, but they are not in the domain of his study. The book I got is largely a transcript of an interview between Campbell and Bill Moyers called, “The Power of Myth.†Here are a few selected excerpts... The last time I saw him (Joseph Campbell) I asked him if he still believed -as he had once written- “that we are at this moment participating in one of the very greatest leaps of the human spirit to a knowledge not only of outside nature but also of our own deep inward mystery.†He thought a minute and answered, “The greatest ever.†The secret cause of all suffering is mortality itself, which is the prime condition of life. It cannot be denied if life is to be affirmed. People say that what we’re all seeking is a meaning for life. I don’t think that’s what we’re really seeking. I think that what we are seeking is an experience of being alive, so that our life experiences on the purely physical plane will have resonances within our innermost being and reality, so that we actually feel the rapture of being alive. Life is, in its very essence and character, a terrible mystery – this whole business of living by killing and eating. But it is a childish attitude to say no to life with all its pain, to say that this is something that should not have been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts