Good Vs Evil and the Myth of Heracles

I have recently come across a website for an organisation called the ‘World Transformation Movement’. The website features the work of an Australian biologist Jeremy Griffith and puts forward an interesting hypothesis that includes a unique interpretation of the question of good vs evil. What I would like to do is to briefly outline Griffith’s hypothesis, and then see how well it correlates with the Hercules myth.

Beyond the Heracles myth being a personal favourite, the reason for choosing it is that it has survived in today’s culturally impoverished times when other Greek myths have slid into obscurity. I am going to suggest that stories and myths that perpetuate are ones that resonate with us because they allude to a deep truth. If this is the case, it makes the Heracles myth a worthy topic of discussion and yardstick for Griffith’s theory.

So to begin with Griffith’s theory: as I understand it (and I will make this as brief as I am able), Griffith posits that humans were originally governed by their instincts. This is not controversial. However he does say that the dominant instinct of our australopithecine ancestors was to behave cooperatively, and that this was an ‘innocent’ state. Importantly, he says that the intellect, as it gradually emerged, inevitably clashed with the pre-established instincts because experiments in self-determination would inevitably result in behaviour that was at odds with our instinctive expectations. Griffith says that the instincts would have ‘in-effect’ criticized these experiments in self-management. In order to persevere the intellect would have had to defy the instincts’ criticism, and so a battle or schism between intellect and instinct was created. This says Griffith, is the origin of the concepts of good and evil. The only solution to end this battle says Griffith, was the finding of understanding of the different ways that the intellect and instincts work. Griffith says that with this understanding the concepts of good and evil are made redundant, and intellect and instinct can be reconciled.

I have covered that very briefly but I trust I have covered the main elements. Now (with thanks to Robert Graves’ excellent book ‘The Greek Myths’) I will attempt to be similarly succinct in my treatment of the Heracles myth.

Heracles was the son of Zeus and a mortal woman. He was however suckled by Hera who is Zeus’ wife, hence the name Heracles which means the son of Hera. As a young man, Heracles was sent mad by Hera (I wont go into the reason for this, but suffice to say that the gods’ background jealousies and plotting make a modern soap opera pale in comparison), and killed his infant sons. As penance for this appalling crime, Heracles had to perform 12 labours. Thus we have the fundamental concept of redemption played out against a background of both good vs evil acts. In the context of this discussion the details of these redemptive labours are not important, except for the events surrounding the so called Eleventh Labour - The Apples of the Hesperides.

What is interesting about this labour (apart from a possible parallel between the Apples of Hesperides and the apple partaken of by Adam and Eve) is that immediately after completing the labour, and obtaining the apples, Heracles goes frees the titan Prometheus. This is recorded in Aeschylus’ ‘Prometheus Unbound’ as well as the Theogeny by Hesiod. The significance of this act is that Prometheus had been bound by the Zeus as punishment for stealing fire from the gods to give to humanity – and fire is the almost universal symbol for the intellect.

So if we now attempt to interpret this chain of events through the prism of Griffith’s theory: we could say that humanity (as personified by Heracles) comes into conflict with their instinctive self (as represented by Heracles slaying of his children). As a result humanity has had to labour to find the knowledge (as represented by Heracles’ 12 Labours) that would eventually enable them to exonerate themselves. When this knowledge is eventually gained (as represented by Heracles’ gaining of the Apples of Hesperides) humanity is finally able to be free of the guilt of having to defy their instincts (as represented by the freeing of Prometheus).

For mine, there are enough parallels here to make the comparison an interesting one. It may be that going forward another exercise would be to look at other enduring myths through the template of Griffith’s theory and look for concordances. As it is, it may be that the story Heracles endures because it refers to a fundamental attempt by humanity to find understanding of its divided self.

If you got anything out of this article you may also like to read another article Aesop and the meaning of life.