Myth plays a significant part in the construction of knowledge and feeds into the creation of sciences, a product of the greater organisation of societies from the 16th century to the present, and the establishment certainly of medical and scientific myths. The period above was a middleclass revolution based on education and siphoned through colonialism.
Dear Stanley,
Thank you for opening such a rich and provocative discussion. I believe that myth is not merely a residue of pre-scientific thinking, but a symbolic infrastructure that continues to shape the epistemic and cultural frameworks of science itself.
In my own work — which bridges musicology, technoculture, and symbolic analysis — I’ve observed that many scientific paradigms carry mythic residues. For example, the myth of the androgyne, once metaphysical, now finds echoes in the transhumanist vision of post-gender embodiment and algorithmic identity. This is not regression, but transformation: myth re-emerges as metaphor in the age of AI and biotechnology.
Medical science, in particular, has long been shaped by mythic narratives — from the Promethean figure of the surgeon to the Faustian ambition of enhancement. These myths are not falsehoods, but symbolic codes that organize meaning and aspiration.
I would argue that the myth-science continuum is not a flaw, but a feature — especially in a planetary intercultural context, where pluralism of meaning is essential. Myth feeds into science not as superstition, but as symbolic resonance, helping societies navigate complexity, uncertainty, and transformation.
Warm regards,
Adrian Leonard Mociulschi
Ambassador of Technoculture
Stanley Wilkin Now we’re making progress. I’m eager to see the response, as I intend to shift the focus to this topic once I have completed my research employing quantitative methodologies.
- Badges
- Science method