Myth as an Ongoing Journey of Relational Meaning: 8 Mythic Phase-Shifts and Social Formation

“Mythology is the secret opening through which the inexhaustible energies of the cosmos pour into human cultural manifestation.”

— Joseph Campbell

Myths are not static relics of the past. They are dynamic phase-shifters in the symbolic systems that constitute social formations. Viewed through relational ontology, myth functions as a mechanism by which societies rephase their symbolic alignment, enabling adaptation, cohesion, and transformation at scale.

Myth as Social Phase-Shift

Social formations — from small tribes to global civilisations — maintain their coherence through symbolic infrastructures that align collective meanings, values, and identities. Myth is one such infrastructure: a reflexive technology that modulates the topology of symbolic possibility across a social field.

When a society faces crisis — ecological, political, existential — mythic phase-shifts emerge to reconfigure construal, allowing new possibilities to appear and new collective alignments to stabilise.

• A ritual may enact symbolic death and rebirth.

• A foundational myth may realign identity and purpose.

• A prophetic narrative may open space for radical transformation.

In all cases, myth is less about content than about performing a rephasing of the symbolic order.

Reflexivity and Collective Alignment

Mythic phase-shifts rely on the reflexivity of social formations: the capacity to observe, critique, and reorient their own symbolic frameworks. This reflexivity allows myth to act as a systemic regulator, mediating tensions between continuity and change.

• Stability is maintained by repeating core myths and rituals.

• Change is accommodated through reinterpretation, hybridization, or new myth-making.

• Conflict arises when competing construals vie for symbolic dominance.

Thus, myth is a dynamic process, not a static text: it is an ongoing negotiation of symbolic possibility within a social field.

The Role of Power and Exclusion

Relational ontology foregrounds the distributed nature of construal, but mythic phase-shifts are never neutral. They embody power relations that shape who can speak, who is visible, and whose realities are phased into collective being.

• Dominant myths may exclude or silence alternative narratives.

• Marginalized groups may generate counter-myths that challenge existing alignments.

• Mythic rephasing is often contested, involving struggle over symbolic infrastructure.

Understanding mythic phase-shifts requires attending to these dynamics of inclusion and exclusion — to how myths serve both cohesion and differentiation within social formations.

Myth Beyond Modernity

Modernity’s promises of rationality and progress often sought to supersede myth as a mode of knowing. Yet, myths persist — in nationalism, consumer culture, environmentalism, and digital imaginaries — continually phasing new symbolic architectures.

Recognizing myth’s ontological role challenges the separation of myth and reason. It invites us to see myth as fundamental to the constitution of social reality, not its opposite.

Conclusion

Mythic phase-shifts are the symbolic mechanisms through which social formations reconstitute themselves in the face of change. They operate by cutting, aligning, and rephasing the symbolic field — modulating the collective possibility space.

In the next post, we will explore how mythic architectures interact with symbolic reflexivity, shaping not only what is possible but how possibility itself is constituted.