<p>Working with image and language models, some people build the symbolic forms, recurring beings, images, and sometimes whole worlds, through which a life becomes intelligible. I call the practice neomythism, and I write about it as researcher, clinical psychologist, and maker. I read neomythism as a postdigital pedagogy. What gets known belongs to the entanglement of person, model, and the cultural archive the model carries, and the learning runs as a self-directed loop. Those who stay are very often people whose inherited symbolic resources failed them. For those people, at its most serious, the practice builds tools for understanding that their inheritance never gave them. Knowledge is now made this way, outside the walls of education. This leaves education a choice, whether to be present where the next era’s selves and worlds are being made.</p>