Steve asked:

Should art be criticized as Socrates does for being a mere imitation? Is the truth associated with
poetry and myth superior to the truth associated with a practical knowledge of the world around us?

============

Art is representational or imitative and so it is obviously removed from factual truth and is not
governed by reason, but this is its nature, and I don't think this provides a ground for criticism. Plato
thought that tragedies gave rise to inappropriate emotions such as explicit displays of grief, when
tragedy is correctly met with quiet fortitude. An alternative view is that art, especially tragedy, is
cathartic and, in any case, our reactions to drama don't necessarily determine our reactions to
personal or real life tragedies.

Reason and practical knowledge of the world around us are not sufficient for the well-rounded growth
of a human being. Myth gives us a sense of the eternal nature of mankind and is a guide to moral
principles. In both psychology and religion, the way we understand ourselves is determined and
explained by mythology. Freud admits that his Oedipal analysis, for example, is a mythology, but it is
a working mythology: It is not assumed to be true. The stories the devil and of Adam and Eve,
likewise, can be understood as mythologies and it doesn't matter if they are true or false, because
they stand as human constructions which incorporate and reinforce the reality of evil and the need for
us struggle if good is to triumph. These two examples of mythology are disparate, but both have a
purpose. The former shows how a person grows and can change and latter tells us about human
nature. We need mythology in the same way as we need family to provide us with a sense of our
background, history, and truths about ourselves, which allow us to know and place ourselves. Myths
provide cultural cohesion and deeply ground morality and values with themes which are not
contemporary and social but rather universal and eternal.

Of course, some myths are relative to culture. Vladimir Propp has examined the structure of
mythology in his book Morphology of the Folk Taleand identifies features common to all (Russian!)
myths, so while it may not matter whether a the story line itself is true, the truth of the elements of the
myth, symbolising what we fear, hope and strive for, do matter since they reflect the human condition,
and as truths, these are things we should aim to know. In the RepublicSocrates argues that moral
feeling should grow from rational thought and would deny that myth can teach us anything, but myths
are based on the truths about man. Socrates claims that often poets don't fully understand what they
are writing about, but even if writers of mythological poems do not fully understand the meaning of
what they are writing, where they manage to express the universal (or cultural) conscious and
unconscious, their writings are recognisable as great works we can learn from.

Those outside mythology, those who reject their cultural mythologies, are isolated individuals (Rollo
May The Cry for Myth). To accept the truths of mythology is to acknowledge moral values and a
common nature — and in a sense this is practical knowledge. Those who have no interest in poetry
are not isolated, since poetry is one art amongst others and is often of contemporary value. However,
the images, emotions and truths that poetry evokes through metaphor cannot be expressed
otherwise, and are important for personal development, if not, perhaps, as important as the truths of
practical knowledge and mythology.

Really, there is no point in identifying superior and inferior truth. All truths are important and the more
truths we come to know, the better off we are.

Rachel Browne