Myth as Constraint: 3 Myth, Value, and the Shape of Worlds

If the previous post showed how myths delineate the space of possible action, this post examines how they shape value — how they determine what is meaningful, desirable, or worthy of attention.

Myths encode priorities. They do not command actions directly, but they signal which states of the world are significant, which behaviours carry weight, and which outcomes merit notice. A myth that celebrates courage, hospitality, or piety shapes perception: acts aligned with these values are intelligible and praiseworthy, while acts outside the narrative framework are invisible or unintelligible.

In this sense, myth functions as a semiotic constraint. It does not produce value ex nihilo, but it structures the perception of value within a cultural or symbolic system. Just as grammar enables meaning by constraining linguistic combinations, myths enable value by constraining the field of meaningful action and attention.

Consider the cosmic order in many creation myths. The very structure of the universe — the separation of sky and earth, the establishment of cycles — is tied to norms about human behaviour and social organisation. What matters to humans is encoded into the shape of the world itself. The symbolic architecture of myth and the ordering of value are inseparable: myth conditions what is salient, and thus what is valued.

Myths also shape collective attention over time. They define recurring motifs, archetypes, and narrative patterns that guide cultural memory, emphasizing certain virtues, dangers, or relationships. Value becomes relational — it emerges within the network of meaning that myth scaffolds, not as an isolated, absolute entity.

This perspective clarifies why myths remain potent even in secular or technologically advanced societies. They are not merely stories or entertainment; they are persistent constraints on intelligibility and evaluation. They define what counts as important, even when explicit rituals or narratives are forgotten or transformed.

Relationally, this positions human cognition and culture within mythic structures. Individuals and collectives discover significance, make judgments, and exercise choice within these constraints. Value is not arbitrary; it is conditioned by the architecture that myths provide.

By recognising myth as shaping value, we also see a continuity with other systems of constraint: physics, biology, and language all operate through relational structuring. Myth, however, uniquely binds the symbolic, moral, and cognitive fields, showing how constraints generate the field of possible significance.

In the next post, we will deepen this structural analogy, comparing myths explicitly with symmetry principles, grammar, and other formal systems, to illuminate the distinctive architecture and generative power of myth as a constraining infrastructure.