> At the risk of getting off topic, where are you studying, and what is
> your new major? (And did you score ENTP on the Meyers-Briggs test?)
>
Was this posted to the list, or e-mailed to me, or both? Sorry, I
haven't been able to check the CHOMSKY list lately, so I'm e-mailing
this back, as I recieved your reply in my personal e-mail. I'm attending
Southern Methodist University in Dallas, TX.
About the Meyers-Briggs test...hahaha -- I still don't know what to
think about that damned thing. In a sense, I don't like tests that try
to pigeonhole people or typecast them, or, as a psychiatrist might
euphemize, "note general tendencies in personality structures" or
whatever. Funny you would suggest ENTP, though, because that is what I
ranked when I took it 3 years ago. Geez, guess that means it's an
accurate test. I might also fit the "FBI Profile for a Terrorist" ...who
knows? It's all arbitrary, and it's serving the interests of someone I
have yet to meet. :L
I'm a Comparative Literature major now. Comp. Lit will make me a
millionaire.
> Right, but (to be terribly picky) adding Romeo and Juliet and Pocahantas
> into the list doesn't help your point any, since it's only meaningful if the
> cultures didn't have any contact with each other before the narratives
> developed. Jung, Campbell & Eliade were all extremely careful in that
> way. (I'm not familiar with "Layli and Majnun"; how old is it?)
I didn't give a good example, as Shakespeare also was open about the
fact that he "borrowed" from "Pyramus and Thisbe" when he wrote "Romeo &
Juliette." [see "A Midsummer Night's Dream," in which Shakespeare makes
open references to "Pyramus..."] Like "Pyramus," "Layli & Majnun" was a
folk tale before it became offically recorded as a story (like the
Bible). There are several different Farsi accounts of the "Layli and
Majnun" story, the most famous being by Nizam-yi Ganjavi, which was set
onto paper in the late 1100s CE. Even if the authors of these legends
*did* have mutual contact with one another's ideas, I don't think that
discredits the presence of archetypes; only a culture's inability to
find meaning and fail to weave these legends into their "cultural
fabric" would discredit an "archetypal presence."
Of course, there is evidence that languages, like myths, had common
origins that were due to things other than archetypes or "pre-conscious
templates". Ancient civilizations were not as isolated as modern people
believe them to be. The reason that Hebrew and Arabic are so similar is
because they share the common parent of Aramaic, for example, which was
spoken at a time when there was open exchange between Mediterranean and
Asian-Indian peoples. There was the primordial Spice Route that
traversed the Middle East and connected China to Europe, in which
stories as well as exotic goods were inter-traded. I think it may be
possible to argue that along an inter-connected route such as this,
ideas were traded and influences exchanged.
Still, I think there's more evidence to support an inherent similarity
in psychic framework within which people form their perceptions. I could
log example after example, but soon I'd have an essay. If you want them,
though, I'll be more than happy to provide them.
Btw, I think it's sad that trumped-up Postmodernists like Dr. Jacques
Lacan have been given credit for reviving Freud's ideas within a modern
context, when it's obvious, as Chomsky also agrees, that most of the
Lacan school are just verbiose and ostentatious dilletantes rather than
actual psychologists.
>
> One of the things which fascinates me most is to watch living
> archetypes interact on so large a scale as a country or culture.
> Do you know anyone who has studied and identified archetypes
> in world politics?
I read an article in which Kennedy and Elvis and other "pop culture"
figures were compared to Orpheus and whonot, but I haven't seen a
book-length work on this. There may already be one, but if not, then
it's a damned good idea...hmmmm......
>
> And I still prefer Chomsky's politcal writings to his linguistics
> research! :-)
>
> <laugh> Ok, so what do you suggest? I'm constantly hearing
> his ideas second-hand, but I think I owe it to everyone on the
> list to read his original writings before I add anything to the
> political discussion here. I just joined a couple days ago, in
> hopes of learning more (Yeah, yeah, "go to a library", well, I'm
> on my way to do that too...). A reading list of three or four books
> to start me off would be much appreciated from anyone.
_The_Chomsky_Reader_ is a good start--excerpts from all his major
works. If you're into websites, I HEAVILY recommend
http://www.worldmedia.com which houses "The Chomsky Archive."
Liberty and peace....
Brian
mailto:[log in to unmask]
--
"If it is correct, as I believe it is, that a fundamental element of
human nature is the need for creative work or creative inquiry, for free
creation without the arbitrary limiting effects of coercive
institutions, then of course it will follow that a decent society should
maximize the possibilities for this fundamental human characteristic to
be realized. Now, a federated, decentralized system of free associations
incorporating economic as well as social institutions would be what I
refer to as anarcho-syndicalism. And it seems to me that it is the
appropriate form of social organization for an advanced technological
society, in which human beings do not have to be forced into the
position of tools, of cogs in a machine. " -- Prof. Noam Chomsky, MIT
|
