What do you guys think of Rene Girard's Mimetic Theory

[hagereParticipant]

What do you guys think of Rene Girard’s Mimetic Theory with regards  to Jesus’ crucifixion and scapegoat mechanism?

It goes like this..

1. We all learn by imitation
2. We imitate not only what we see others do but also their very desires
3. Ultimately, this leads us to conflict because there is usually a limited supply of what we desire (food, opposite sex, etc.)
4. This conflict escalates and threatens to destroy the community/friendship
5. We subconsciously transfer our hostility on to a scapegoat who is usually someone/group different than us or vulnerable
6. Our union around blaming the scapegoat and shunning them, killing them, or bad-mouthing them, etc. creates a bond of union between us that replaces/heals the conflict.
7. We are now friends/community once again because our hostility toward each other has been transferred to the scapegoat.

It is said that the Gospel breaks us out of this cycle by showing us that the victim is actually innocent. It gives us a new way of reconciling our conflicts; that is forgiveness! By God in Jesus suffering unjustly at our hands, taking the place of the scapegoat, and then responding with forgiveness instead of retribution, we both learn how and are empowered to offer forgiveness to others.

Girard asserts that Jesus came for this reason to help humanity break free from the cycle of mimetic desire that is marked by violence. He also asserts that Jesus’ sacrifice is meant to be the final scapegoat to end all future sacrifices so that the human experience will be in the post-mimetic stage where the kingdom of God rules in each person with hope and peace

What say you?-:)

• This topic was modified 1 year, 10 months ago by  hagere.

[David HaywardKeymaster]

I am a huge fan of Girard. His book “I See Satan Fall Like Lightening” was one of the most powerful reads for me last year. I agree with his theory.

[HughParticipant]

I had not heard of Girard before. This is interesting. I had to go to YouTube to view the video. The following paragraph is from wiki….

“Girard developed the concept much more extensively as an interpretation of human culture. In Girard’s view, it is humankind, not God, who has the problem with violence. Humans are driven by desire for that which another has or wants (mimetic desire). This causes a triangulation of desire and results in conflict between the desiring parties. This mimetic contagion increases to a point where society is at risk; it is at this point that the scapegoat mechanism[9] is triggered. This is the point where one person is singled out as the cause of the trouble and is expelled or killed by the group. This person is the scapegoat. Social order is restored as people are contented that they have solved the cause of their problems by removing the scapegoated individual, and the cycle begins again. The keyword here is “content”, scapegoating serves as a psychological relief for a group of people. Girard contends that this is what happened in the case of Jesus. The difference in this case, Girard believes, is that he was resurrected from the dead and shown to be innocent; humanity is thus made aware of its violent tendencies and the cycle is broken. Thus Girard’s work is significant as a re-construction of the Christus Victor atonement theory.” (from wiki, scapegoating)

Philosophers are interesting but I find that like everyone of us they can have blinders on causing one to narrow their field of vision down to their particular view to the exclusion of a larger picture which may show multiple influences. I have read that he is a devout Catholic.

[Anonymous]

Never heard of this guy or his Mimetic theory before, but I’m definitely intrigued!  Thanks for sharing!!

[Anonymous]

Yes, I agree with Girard’s hypothesis.

[RichardParticipant]

I’m more with Joseph Campbell’s ideas on this.  He studied how myths formed the psychology of humanity. He felt that certain aspects of human experience could only be captured through myth.  This is from Wikipedia…
Campbell often described mythology as having a fourfold function for human society. These appear at the end of his work The Masks of God: Creative Mythology, as well as various lectures.

The Metaphysical Function: Awakening a sense of awe before the mystery of being
According to Campbell, the absolute mysteries of life cannot be captured directly in words or images. Myths are “being statements”[27] and the experience of this mystery can be had only through a participation in mythic rituals or the contemplation of mythic symbols that point beyond themselves. “Mythological symbols touch and exhilarate centers of life beyond the reach of reason and coercion…. The first function of mythology is to reconcile waking consciousness to the mysterium tremendum et fascinans of this universe as it is.”
The Cosmological Function: Explaining the shape of the universe
Myth also functions as a proto-science, bringing the observable (physical) world into accord with the metaphysical and psychological meanings rendered by the other functions of mythology. Campbell noticed that the modern dilemma between science and religion on matters of truth is actually between science of the ancient world and that of today.
The Sociological Function: Validate and support the existing social order
Ancient societies had to conform to an existing social order if they were to survive at all. This is because they evolved under “pressure” from necessities much more intense than the ones encountered in our modern world. Mythology confirmed that order and enforced it by reflecting it into the stories themselves, often describing how the order arrived from divine intervention.
The Pedagogical Function: Guide the individual through the stages of life
As a person goes through life, many psychological challenges will be encountered. Myth may serve as a guide for successful passage through the stages of one’s life. For example, most ancient cultures used rites of passage as a youth passed to the adult stage. Later on, a living mythology taught the same person to let go of material possessions and earthly plans as they prepared to die.

Campbell believed that if myths are to continue to fulfill their vital functions in our modern world, they must continually transform and evolve because the older mythologies, untransformed, simply do not address the realities of contemporary life, particularly with regard to the changing cosmological and sociological realities of each new era.
So, rather than having a god purpose this to happen, I find it more likely it came from a natural societal evolution in reaction to the awakening consciousness of human beings.  And in many ways what we do here is creating new mythology.

[Author]

Posts