CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY AND METHODS
3.1 Methodology
I n the previous chapter, I pointed to the possibility that mythopoeic
consciousness evolved out of the original psychic state of participation mystique
initially shamanic, and that remnants or expressions of that consciousness could be
seen in various manifestations throughout history and up to the present time. That
archaic form of mythic or mythopoeic consciousness with a narrative modality is
allied to the I maginal Realm identified by the Sufi mystics and carried through by
the Romantics, who acted as a bridge to the present time. This narrative psyche
produces an undercurrent that feeds the human psyche.
The evidence presented in Chapter 2 suggests that if shamanism is given a
less restricted cultural, historical and geographic definition then it could explain
particular altered states of consciousness such as MLC and its aetiology could be
linked to concepts such as the I maginal Realm of the Sufi mystics, the collective
unconscious of Jung and the noosphere of de Chardin.
This chapter will consider the combination of empirical and textual research
undertaken to bring to light contemporary expressions of this archaic consciousness.
The research is directed at questions such as:
- To what degree is mythopoeic deep writing and deep reading reflective
of an altered state of consciousness, specifically the shamanic state of
consciousness? - Do certain mythopoeic writers, and their readers habitually enter an
altered state of consciousness? - I s such a state accessible only to what I identify as mythopoeic writers
and their readers? - I f so, what is it in their nature or background that makes them
susceptible and responsive to such an altered state of consciousness? - How do these individuals access such a state of consciousness?
- What is the relationship of these factors to place and what then is
revealed about the real nature and dimension of place; is it constant or
dynamic?