In earlier societies surely there were enough real matter or social needs to generate conflicts.
Why is mimesis assumption of Girard important?
Good question. Imagine primitive societies limited resources: food, weapons, mating partners, shelter, hunting grounds, tribal power/authority/leadership.
Among many other things, we can see that primitive societies had to be mechanisms to resolve conflicts mimetic associated with limited resources and power.
The Scapegoat, sacrifice, and religious practices that result are likely candidates.
Regarding the importance of mimesis to the hypothesis René Girard, it is essential to remember that the mimetic theory is itself a hypothesis.
But ultimately, the same imitation abilities that allow us to learn and copy others (language, culture, etc.) are also the capabilities that help us form the desire (Girard).
Today, the human species seems less and less aware of this mimesis. Individuals want to be themselves. Yet mimesis is still everywhere.
The desires of others Copy leads (to) the rivalry on the object and therefore conflict.
The scapegoat is a mechanism in companies to restrict it.
Therefore, mimesis is an essential component Girard to anthropological findings suggest.
He is the father of the lie that is fundamental lies-
For more societies – this lie is the so-called guilt of the victim.
Mimesis is not always innocent. For animals, it is often a matter of life and death, and for humans, it is equally about power. The power exercised over them allows people to become someone else. And vice versa, they can counter-power by trying to embody it.
The mimetic theory is important because it allows us to think clearly and thoroughly about the greatest threat to human survival: our violence.
It provides the best possible analysis of the causes of conflict, the contagious nature of violence, and the ubiquitous use of the scapegoat mechanism by individuals and communities.
The lasting value of the theory, however, lies in the guidance it offers to end the scourge of violence and in its cues to establish a genuine and lasting peace.
As a true outsider, René Girard has changed the thinking of academics about literature, anthropology, and religion.
But you don’t have to be an academic or initiated into the mimetic theory to understand it. Imitation is constant, the scapegoat mechanism is a ubiquitous temptation, and violence is wrong.
These relatively simple insights have unlocked the meaning of novels, ancient myths, religious traditions, and the behavior of each of us in our daily lives.
Today, academics around the world are building on Girard’s work to better understand our world.
Their work provides the foundation for resolving conflicts, violence, and wars that have plagued humanity for so long.
Imitatio, a not-for-profit association, is committed to the providing support to promote this continued development in the humanities.
Preaching peace and Theology and Peace work with the theological implications of mimetic theory for Christian educators.
There is also a growing number of authors and bloggers, including Brian McLaren and Richard Beck, who use mimetic theory to analyze religion, conflict and contemporary culture.
At The Raven Foundation, we use Girard’s insights to expose the scapegoat mechanism in current events, political situations, romantic relationships, rivalry at work, religious conflict, and showbiz.
The mimetic theory is important for anyone seeking more stability and
building more peaceful personal, religious, political, and international relations.
Since our desire is mimetic, it is also triangular.
Contrary to popular belief, objects have no intrinsic value and our desires do not arise spontaneously, in the U.S.
Our desire is not tied to a particular object, and thus it becomes dependent on a model that can direct it towards a particular object.
In other words, there is never a direct line between us and the object of our desire – our desires are copied from models or mediators whose desired objects also become our desired objects. But the model or mediator imitated by us can become our rival if we desire the same object he is supposed to possess. Or other imitators of the same model can compete with us for the same objects. The more these models that have become rivals desire the object, the more my desire will increase mimesis.
Jealousy and envy are inevitably aroused in this mimetic situation.
Another major cause of conflict is pride. Because we enjoy the illusion of our autonomy – including the autonomy of our desires – we deny that our rival is also our model. He seems to be just a stubborn enemy who, out of sheer malice, is determined to stand in the way of the fulfillment of my desire. That makes my hatred and envy seem completely justified. Rather than recognizing how similar we are at the level of our desires (the foundation for friendship), we nurture the resentment that our false sense of superiority creates. pleases.