I think an good example of what Campbell is referring to is found when certain sects take the creation myth from the book of Genesis as fact, believing that the Earth is only 6,000 years old. It's that kind of foolishness Campbell is calling out.

Yes, the allegory points to some facts: the planet came into existence, and life came later. But the process took 4.7 billion years, not 6,000, and involved no supernatural intervention at any point. Taken literally, the metaphor becomes a lie.

@Flyingsaucesir Yes but of course, but who knows what the original intension of the writers was. And since it was probably made up from many different parts, all taken from different cultures, it most probably originally contained both metaphor and mistaken attempts at literal truth, the two being not mutually exclusive.

Sometimes the extreme literalists seem to be the most dangerous of religions parts, but they are often few in number even if they are loud. I would contend however that the so called more moderate, metaphorical cult, because it is so widespread and manages keep below the radar is actually more harmful and dangerous in the bigger picture. I will I think be posting on this soon, watch out for it if you are interested.

@Fernapple I'm not sure it matters what the original intention was. We know what the facts are. That is what matters. Any literal interpretation of metaphor or allegory is nonsense.

I have long held that the moderate believers in supernatural intervention, though they may disavow the extremists among them, nevertheless enable the extremism. Once you get on that slippery slope of belief in fiction, anything goes.

If there's no difference between metaphor and fact then facts are metaphors and that's a metaphor.

@Polemicist No it only works the one way round, metaphors may be ways of expressing facts, but facts are never ways to metaphors. In truth the whole danger of metaphors, is that they are as good a way to express false facts, as they are true ones. Which is perhaps what makes them the core of religion.

@Polemicist, @Flyingsaucesir Yes I agree it certainly does not matter what the original intension was, but religious people often think it does. Indeed it is often way way for apologists to go even beyond cherry picking. If I like it, it is probably intended literally, if I don't like it it was intended metaphorically and means something else.

If they like it that Jesus said. "Do not lay up treasure." Then that is literal. If they don't like it that the Bible says the world was made in six days, then that is metaphorical.

I believe metaphors more often allude to possibilities rather than facts.

@CallMeDave Perhaps yes, in the sense of they point in a direction without giving a route, but in the sense of, it is a fact that there are these possibilities, then possibilities are facts too. Fact, in my meaning here anyway, includes both probable and certain.

Metaphor has to point to something or it is not metaphor, and there are only three things, possibilities, lies and certainties. So I am perhaps being kind to metaphor by leaving lies out.

My favorite metaphors tend to come from Shakespeare and the Bible. For example, I like the "feet of clay" metaphor to represent human weaknesses such as greed, envy, lust, rage, addiction, sloth, etc. It kinda fits. It's...poetic.

@Flyingsaucesir

Are feet truly made of clay? If not, the “feet of clay” metaphor is a lie.

@yvilletom In a sense, they are. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust.

@Flyingsaucesir @yvilletom
Google:
"Feet of clay": 1. a weakness or hidden flaw in the character of a greatly admired or respected person. He was disillusioned to find that even Lincoln had feet of clay. 2. any unexpected or critical fault.
What does feet of clay mean in the Bible?
An entity with feet of clay may appear powerful and unstoppable, but they cannot support their splendor, and will easily be knocked over. The phrase originates from the Book of Daniel in the Bible. In it, Daniel interprets a dream of King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon.
[en.wikipedia.org].

Power and money!