Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Human Relations
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jackson, N. V.
Right arrow Articles by Carter, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Attenuating Function of Myth in Human Understanding

N. V. Jackson

Management Centre, University of Aston

P. Carter

Management Centre, University of Aston

Ashby's Law of Requisite Variety demands the insertion of a variety attenuator in any homeostatic system to regulate the relationship between the high variety environment and the low variety monitor. We argue that, in the system which is constituted by man and his environment, this function is performed by myth, i.e., that myth is a variety attenuator. The nature of the concept of myth is explored, and a relationship traced between the functions of classical myth and contemporary modes of understanding. Some implications follow, in particular, that serious dysfunctions inevitably occur as a result of overattenuation where the environmental variety increases at a greater rate than man's ability to understand it, as in the present technological age.

Human Relations, Vol. 37, No. 7, 515-533 (1984)
DOI: 10.1177/001872678403700702


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Human RelationsHome page
W. Van Buskirk and D. McGrath
Organizational Cultures as Holding Environments: A Psychodynamic Look at Organizational Symbolism
Human Relations, June 1, 1999; 52(6): 805 - 832.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Management EducationHome page
W. Van Buskirk
Enhancing Sensitivity to Organizational Symbols and Culture: An Experiential Approach for the Classroom
Journal of Management Education, May 1, 1991; 15(2): 170 - 192.
[Abstract]


Home page
Organization StudiesHome page
N. Jackson and P. Carter
In Defence of Paradigm Incommensurability
Organization Studies, January 1, 1991; 12(1): 109 - 127.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Applied Behavioral ScienceHome page
T. L. Scheid-Cook
Mitigating Organizational Contradictions: The Role of Mediatory Myths
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, May 1, 1988; 24(2): 161 - 171.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Human RelationsHome page
P. K. Manning
Signwork
Human Relations, April 1, 1986; 39(4): 283 - 307.
[Abstract] [PDF]