In Carl Jung's definition of archetypes, he links their origin to the "collective unconscious". Disregarding any semi-spiritual connotations, this refers to shared experiences and subsequent ideas in human cultures.
One can see how similar ideas would arise in different cultures regardless of physical distances, as the human mind often follows patterns of "methodology"
The similarities in the journeys of heroes and methodologies of myths seem to paint a picture of a kind of accidental story theory.
This idea is further supported by Gustav Freytag, a German playwright who famously created a dramatic pyramid exemplifying the course of a proper story, moving from beginning, to middle, and finally to the end. His pyramid was not a wholly original idea, but rather one discovered simply by examining common traits in storytelling.
The idea of archetypes may be (unintentionally) connected to Plato's concept of ideals or "forms". We sometimes recognise a "good" character or story when we can easily identify them as part of a familiar and well-constructed cliche, just as we might recognise a good institution by coming to the conclusion that it has all the positive traits that this institution should have, or a good job on the basis that it provides the worker with good money, and fulfilling work.
In this case, archetypes may represent our most basis fantasies of what life "should" be. This isn't in itself a good thing, as unrealistic expectations can lead quite easily to disappointment and subsequent depression. Perhaps we should, rather than promote, challenge and examine these common archetypes.
Focusing on the ideal forms of everyday things is one of the best ways to begin reforming the world, but it remains the cautionary tale of failed insurrections and uprisings that failure to define goals leads to imperfect institutions.
Finally! A philosophy tag that can actually be discussed. "Collective Unconsciousness" is a concept I have been contemplating for a very long time. The fact that these 'archetypes' appear is often explained away by genetics, stating that need has always driven our evolution. Humanity as a species developed as it did out of necessity.
I like to deviate from that explanation slightly. Need DID drive our evolution and development, but I also believe that some abilities, thoughts and even memories may be hereditary. We see it often enough in nature and recent studies of children in controlled environments seem to support this thought. Children were for example, able to pick up skills like computer use, phone use and some other things much quicker than their parents. What was remarkable was that the children of engineers naturally gravitated towards building, fixing and problem-solving puzzles and activities. Could a "Collective Unconsciousness" exist? Very likely, but I am more inclined to believe in genetics or genetic memory.
Thank you for a fun thought. I will be following you!
Thanks! I'm happy you enjoyed my little "exploration" and even happier you took the time to write out a well-constructed reply.
Might I add - & for failing to set goals for oneself this leads to ravenous, unsatiated greed