COnsider Eliade's division of reality and experience into the sacred and the profane in his book of that title: Much of what is considered to be ceonventional human behavior seems to fall into the category of the profane, while at times the sacred seems to be impossibly trascendent. Is his notion of homo religiosus, "religious man," then, a real and useful conception? Are there contradictions in Eliade's theory and myth? What is one to make, for instance, of a myth that seems to depict, or a religion that seems to valorize, profane behavior?
Comments 10
Me too, I can't read LOTR. I've read the first one and that's it, but I own all 3 movies.
Croutons rule! I eat them like crackers sometimes. haha
I've never met my two very best friends either, but I hope to one day.
Haha, you're right. Chris is cuter.
Reply
I'm going to fail and it's all your fault going to drive me crazy and I'm going to starve to death in a ditch.
Reply
COnsider Eliade's division of reality and experience into the sacred and the profane in his book of that title: Much of what is considered to be ceonventional human behavior seems to fall into the category of the profane, while at times the sacred seems to be impossibly trascendent. Is his notion of homo religiosus, "religious man," then, a real and useful conception? Are there contradictions in Eliade's theory and myth? What is one to make, for instance, of a myth that seems to depict, or a religion that seems to valorize, profane behavior?
FAIL NOT.
Reply
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment