Myth as Construal, Part 3: The Evolution of Symbolic Possibility

If myths and archetypes are methods of construal at scale, then their power lies not in rigidity, but in adaptability. The evolution of symbolic possibility shows how relational alignment, cultural context, and individual interpretation coalesce over time.

Myths as living frameworks

Myths are not static stories preserved unchanged across generations. They are living frameworks, continually re-construed as societies, communities, and individuals negotiate meaning. Every retelling, every adaptation, is a cut into potential, shaping what is actualised and what remains latent.

Interaction of individual and collective

The evolution of symbolic possibility depends on the interplay between:

• Individual interpretation — the construals each person makes within the mythic field.

• Collective patterning — the broader archetypal and cultural structures that maintain coherence and alignment.

This interplay ensures that myths are simultaneously flexible and stabilising: flexible enough to accommodate new contexts, stabilising enough to sustain shared meaning and coordination.

Adaptation and innovation

• New social conditions, technologies, and ideas introduce novel possibilities into the symbolic field.

• Myths and archetypes evolve to incorporate these possibilities, maintaining alignment while opening new potential.

• Symbolic evolution mirrors relational ontology itself: reality as possibility-in-motion, shaped through ongoing actualisation and alignment.

Implications

• Myths are dynamic participants in cultural evolution, not passive reflections of the world.

• Understanding their evolution reveals how collective construals emerge, adapt, and propagate.

• Relational method allows us to trace these dynamics, showing how symbolic structures both shape and are shaped by social life.

The final post in this series will synthesise these insights, showing how myth functions as a collective method of construal, linking back to theory, practice, and reflexive method, and preparing the way for further explorations of symbolic architecture.