The purpose of this essay is to analyze and evaluate Jonathan Z. Smith`s theory of myth from the viewpoint of Paul Ricoeur`s hermeneutics of symbol. Ricoeur`s hermeneutics of symbol describes the process of recovering the ontological depth of human beings, which the moderns lost and forgot. The most important step in this process is the stage of corrective critique. In the corrective critique, a subject finds its own illusion, which Ricoeur calls the Cartesian ego. The subject which escaped from this illusion finally sees the structure of his or her own being. Ricoeur shows a concrete picture of the structure of being through analyzing Freud`s psychoanalysis and Hegel`s phenomenology of spirit. The analysis of Freul`s psychoanalysis gives the subject the archaeology of the subject. Hegel`s phenomenology of spirit provides the subject with the teleology of the subject. The dialectic of the archaeology and the teleology reveals the fact that the Cartesian ego exists within the depth of being, not vice versa. Eliade`s phenomenology of religion shows us the dialectic of the sacred and the profane in which the subject realizes its rootedness in the sacred or in the whole. From the viewpoint of the hermeneutics of symbol, myth always functions within a specific symbolism, in which the subject realizes his or her depth of being. Evaluating Smith`s understanding of myth from the perspective of Ricoeur`s hermeneutics of symbol, we can find that Smith`s mythology excludes the ontological function of myth and makes its intellectual and epistemological aspect conspicuous. Beyond the locative would view emphasizing order and conformity and the utopian world view accentuating transcendence and turnover, which Smith learned from Eliade, Smith suggests a new paradigm of his mythology which is based on the perception of incongruity between idealistic world views and realistic situations. In this paradigm, myth is basically understood as an intellectual tool which human beings use to deal with the gap between their own would views and a newly emerging situation in the middle of a social upheaval. However, his understanding myth implies an ontological aspect of myth in the sense that the pieces of myth should go back to the fecundity of sumbols in order to draw new meanings from them, with which they can properly describe the new situations. In this regard, Smith`s mythology is not only a mythology without ontology but also a mythology with a lived ontology.