This series has resisted endings.
Not because endings are forbidden, but because closure has been the very temptation under examination. To end well, here, is not to conclude, but to place.
Myth must be situated.
After Systems
Systems are indispensable.
They allow us to formalise relations, to stabilise expectations, to coordinate action at scale. Systems make explicit what would otherwise remain implicit. They are powerful precisely because they close: they define what counts, what follows, what is excluded.
But systems cannot inhabit what they describe.
They operate at a distance from experience. They trade responsiveness for coherence, sensitivity for consistency. This is not a flaw; it is their function.
The danger arises when systems forget their limits.
When systems claim totality, they begin to erase the very relations they were built to support. Meaning collapses into function. Attention is replaced by compliance. What cannot be formalised is dismissed as noise.
Myth comes after systems.
Not chronologically, but structurally.
Before Doctrine
If systems err by overextending closure, doctrine errs by enforcing it.
Doctrine tells us how things must be understood, what meanings are permitted, which interpretations are legitimate. Where systems coordinate, doctrine polices. Where systems stabilise, doctrine hardens.
Doctrine offers certainty.
But certainty comes at the cost of responsiveness. Once meaning is fixed, relation is no longer required. The work of attention is replaced by adherence.
Myth must come before doctrine.
Not as a primitive precursor, but as a refusal of foreclosure.
The Interval
Between systems and doctrine lies an interval.
This is where myth lives.
It is not a foundation, and not a conclusion. It does not generate rules, nor does it enforce belief. It keeps open what systems tend to close and what doctrine seeks to seal.
Myth inhabits this interval by sustaining orientation without prescription.
Why This Placement Matters
Placed incorrectly, myth becomes either:
superstition to be eliminated by systems, or
ideology to be enforced by doctrine.
Placed here, myth performs a different function.
It preserves the conditions under which meaning remains livable. It keeps theory from ossifying. It reminds systems of what they abstract from, and doctrine of what it prematurely fixes.
Myth is not opposed to rigour.
It is what allows rigour to remain humane.
The Figure Recedes
The figure does not stop.
But she no longer needs to be followed. She has served her function—not by delivering a message, but by making a posture visible.
She walks between formalisations and commands, neither rejecting structure nor submitting to final meaning. The path remains open because she does not claim it.
What Remains
What remains after this series is not a thesis to defend, nor a doctrine to adopt.
What remains is a way of holding meaning:
without mastery
without destiny
without closure
This way is fragile.
It requires discipline.
Not an Ending
There is nothing to conclude.
Myth does not end where this series ends. It continues wherever attention is sustained without guarantee, wherever relation is renewed without instruction, wherever meaning is carried rather than secured.
The series stops.
The work does not.
No comments:
Post a Comment