|
| Is Jungian psychology a religion? |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| Margreta |
 Posted: Mon 11 Apr, 2005 7:07 pm Post subject: Is Jungian psychology a religion? |
 |
|
Site Admin
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 2546
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
Popular name for a topic. 
(I hope I am not the only one who smiled at the irony of comment of censure in the "Feedback" topic of the Jung Page forum about the creeping religiousity in yonder forum, while a thread bearing this name (resurrected from the year 2000) now carries pride of place in the "Religion" forum.)
This topic started life as a clarification about online enclopedia entries and has evolved into an expanded articulation of my own conclusions, based on my experience of years in the "Jung Talk" (formerly Jungpage Forum) having to do with a significant matter of intellectual dishonesty and its relationship to undertaking to re-write the truth and in this case, its parallels to religious indoctrination.
The manipulation of truth was a matter that R.D. Laing was profoundly troubled by, his major thesis having been an articulation of how the effort to control 'reality', and the social phantasy systems that emerge from these false belief systems have brought us to the point of finding ourselves on the verge of extinction.
Laing saw through the deceit of the abstractions that people use to escape their own responsibility in the unfolding of events. "States" do not make history, a "State" does not go to war. The actions are the actions of individual men and women.
So, I suppose I'm more inclined to see things in relationship of praxis to process: the praxis - the who, what and when - that leads to a certain process coming about, and in this particular case, the process of inculcation of the Jung forum as undertaking to create a passive, and uncritical "following" rather than provide a place of any credible theoretical or practical discussion about Jung's legacy to contemporary thought.
I'm not posting an exhaustive list of examples because (1) with a few examples, it's easy enough to get the idea, and (2) this has been going on for so long and isn't going to change, and most of all, (3)I'm fed up with it and would like to turn my attention (permanently) to ten thousand things that inspire.
Re my earlier gripe:
| Quote: |
And for the record: THIS is exactly the kind of thing that will make sure that vibrant thinkers, Jungian or not, would have nothing to do with the Jung forum, if the kind of articles on the site say this:
| Quote: |
"Jung's model of the psyche, which can be also called the classical or standard model of the psyche..."
I Ching as the Model of the Psyche
Written by Ivan Dugic
|
This is the kind of head up butt thinking that alienates people. Not now and not ever has Jung's model been taken as "the standard" or "classical" model. There's a whole VAST world of thought and Jung is only one of many. To the chagrin of those who long to worship at his feet. Wishing don't make it so.
Sorry for my pissedoff-ness. It isn't waht he said, even but the arrogant insularity of it that hacks me off.
|
It appears that the Jungian view of the archetype is also being manipulated thanks to Matthew's 'editing':
| Quote: |
from The Jungpage forum
http://www.cgjungpage.org/talk/showthread.php?t=4054
What Is An Archetype?
The archetype is a concept of psychologist Carl Gustav Jung. In this context, archetypes are innate prototypes for ideas, which may subsequently become involved in the interpretation of observed phenomena. A group of memories and interpretations closely associated with an archetype is called a complex, and may be named for its central archetype (e.g. "mother complex"). Jung often seemed to view the archetypes as sort of psychological organs, directly analogous to our physical, bodily organs: both being morphological givens for the species; both arising at least partially through evolutionary processes. There are four famous forms of archetypes numbered by Jung:
* The Self
* The Shadow
* The Anima
* The Animus
The symbols of the unconscious abound in Jungian psychology:
* The Syzygy (Divine Couple, e.g. Aeons)
* The Child (examples: Linus van Pelt, Arnold Shortman)
* The Superman (the Omnipotent)
[...and so on]
|
| Quote: |
Archetype
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archetype
Archetype is defined as the first original model of which all other similar persons, objects, or concepts are merely derivative, copied, patterned, or emulated. The term is often used in literature, architecture, and the arts to refer to something that goes back to the fundamental origins of style, method, gold standard, or physical construct. Shakespeare, for example, is epitomized for popularizing many archetypal characters, not because he was the first that we know of to write them, but because he defined those roles amongst the backdrop of a complex, social literary landscape. Thus, the characters stand out as original by contrast, even though many of his characters were based on previously-garnered archetypes (Shakespeare often borrowed from fables, myths and magic to construct and embellish his plays).
The imitation process of an archetype or prototype itself is called a pastiche (noun), in which one who mimicks pays homage to the original creator.
Jungian archetypes
The archetype is also a concept of psychologist Carl Gustav Jung. In this context, archetypes are innate prototypes for ideas, which may subsequently become involved in the interpretation of observed phenomena. A group of memories and interpretations closely associated with an archetype is called a complex, and may be named for its central archetype (e.g. "mother complex"). Jung often seemed to view the archetypes as sort of psychological organs, directly analogous to our physical, bodily organs: both being morphological givens for the species; both arising at least partially through evolutionary processes. There are four famous forms of archetypes numbered by Jung:
* The Self
* The Shadow
* The Anima
* The Animus
The symbols of the unconscious abound in Jungian psychology:
* The Syzygy (Divine Couple, e.g. Aeons)
* The Child (examples: Linus van Pelt, Arnold Shortman)
* The Superman (the Omnipotent)
[...and so on]
|
Not in 30 years have I ever known of an individual, or a school of psychology or pyschotherapy to engage in this habitual practice of claiming other thought to one person.
Given the history of the 'discovery' of the Solar Phallus Man, and given the work of Sabina Speilrien that found its way into Jung's publications while she languished in prison and her (unpublished) doctoral dissertation sat in his desk drawer, to name only two, perhaps it's time for the "true Jungians" to acknowledge Jung's contribution in his own right and end this deceitful game of attribution. Instead it seems the effort has recently been 'stepped up' to deify Jung.
After Bush's great campaign of lies and what it has cost, I doubt that people are going to have much patience with this kind of thing. It tends to lower a person's threshold for doctored documents.
I note the end of Matthew Clapp's 'FAQ's include:
© Wikipedia
The © symbol will not be found on the Wikipedia site because Wikipedia is not copyright, it is copyleft. The articles are free and no author specified. However, that little © Wikipedia at the bottom would suggest to anyone the article appears as it was published. To revise the text without stating so and then post a © is plainly dishonest - it should have said excerpted from - or based on - , or any number of things authors use to acknowledge that it is not cited verbatim.
I didn't bother to read any of the other New Topics. I'm not in any hurry to read that Carl Jung was the originator of the word psychology. Only a matter of time and they'll figure that's another one they can slip in, as I've read articles on the Jung Page site which claimed that the word synchronicity was 'originally coined by Jung', and that the terms introversion, extroversion and projection, all original to Freud, were, of course, now Jung's ideas.
Not long ago in the forum I read an article someone had taken about "Irritable Old Man Syndrome" (or something like that) and took the actual article, posted the link to it, and then altered the article to make it look like the author of it had gone on about how "Jung understood this long ago...". The revisions to the posted article included some deletions, additions, and often, a sentence begun by the author of the article was revised to suit the forum member's "Jungian" perception of the author's intention.
Now it seems that a certain kind of post has started to find its way into the topics with greater frequency. The kind that give off the strange odour of somebody who's 'snapped', (if you're familiar with the book, Snapping), a kind of AA hand-on-heart testimonial... "How I found Jung...", kind of rap. And someone else replies with a very glazed-gaze "... for you are living the symbolic life" thing that sounded like somebody who needed to get snatched from the Settlement.
To an observer (i.e., a 'non-believer'), these sorts of 'dialogues' are indistinguishable from any fundamentalist church forum, yet they seem quite completely oblivious to this, believing that they have disengaged themselves from 'organised religion', when clearly it has been a matter of replacing it with another.
That a concerted effort is made to identify Jung as the Creator of so many concepts which he had in fact co-opted, (with dismissive acknowledgement, whenever he did acknowledge, and on more than one occasion, when he did not in fact reprehensibly claim authorship himself), exploits the predisposition of people who are usually visiting such sites because a personal crisis or a crossroads has led them there.
One cannot help but wonder why, if Jung was a thinker of such extraordinary breadth and genius, it would be necessary to engage in this intellectual dishonesty. It was certainly never the case that Jung welcomed rigorous discussion or critical examination of his ideas. He surrounded himself with individuals who were satisfied to sit in his shadow. He was not 'rejected' by mainstream psychiatry as much as the fact that he withdrew. Perhaps a moderator who seeks to silence any possible challenge to his 'authority' and to cull any who read with an objective eye from the forum is merely aping his Master's design.
Of course, this does not begin to address other themes in the Jung forum over the past years, most saliently, the blatant denigration of women - another universal theme in religious fundamentalism. There is no record in the Jungpage archives of a male member of that forum being banned for his abusiveness toward women, no matter how graphic nor how violent, because it was uniformly declared to be 'symbolic' and the female to whom the attack was directed was merely the 'object of projections' (but not really projections, because everything hateful said about any female in the forum was absolutely true). The single occasion where a male member of the forum was threatened with banning for something in the area of sexual harassment was one occasion of satirically questioning the sexuality of another male member. Attacking the sexuality of women by 'men' in the forum was commonplace, and women were banned more often than men, probably in a ratio consistent with the number of women to men who were drowned and burned at the stake in earlier times.
One thing that has always amused me (when it did not annoy me), about the blindness of the acolytes to their religious project, are the little Latin flourishes Jung so loved to dot his texts with. It would be interesting to muse upon the question of whether it was a consciously or unconsciously motivated suggestion to his followers in the course of fulfilling the 'destiny' of his deeply ambitious drive to be "Jung, and not a Jungian". That he held ambitions of such a legacy does not in any respect diminish the magnitude of his work. It makes him human. To the distress of those who need someone to cling to, who turn their pages to paragraph 868 of The Holy Works.
Sacre Domine. Dominus vobiscum. Sacre. Sacre.
Well, for anybody over there who wakes up screaming,
remember what RDL always said:
"Don't take it serious, it's just an experience." 
>|< |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Renee |
| Posted: Mon 11 Apr, 2005 10:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 183
Location: Mother Earth
|
We build our religions around our "ultimate concerns".....I've come to view religion as something exterior - something with dogma, ritual and buy-in by a community of "believers". Those who speak of spiritual things have captured my attention. One might wonder if I "worship" the authors and subjects of the books I have stacked upon my shelves, tables, chairs and floor.....
Because we are social beings - not islands - but mostly living fuller lives if we can have meaningful connections with others - it seems natural that a precious resonnance would occur for those of us who might find a "friend" in Jung (and others who speak of a spiritual aspect of life)....even though some of the stuff about his personal life pisses me off. And, yes, I would love to find a live community of people where these thoughts could be discussed - pondered - etc. It might even feel like "religion"....
What is so refreshing "here" is the absence of gender conflict that destroys....and also the presence of critical thinkers....of challenges to "what is" and "what has been" for the sake of a clearer representation of "what might be".....
Here's to the radical ideas that cause us to think more lucidly about this convoluted world and how we can all make our best effort at living in it with exuberance and wonder!
~R |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| XenaWar |
| Posted: Tue 12 Apr, 2005 8:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 05 Mar 2004
Posts: 151
|
Thanks Margreta,
I wasn't following you about the editting of the Wikipedia entry at all. I agree about intellectual dishonesty. Think I'd get banned for posting a copy of the original? Damn I'm tempted...... 
| Quote: |
| I hope I am not the only one who smiled at the irony of comment of censure in the "Feedback" topic of the Jung Page forum about the creeping religiousity in yonder forum, while a thread bearing this name (resurrected from the year 2000) now carries pride of place in the "Religion" forum.) |
Great observation, and thanks for that too. It's funny how my statement re. the recent changes and the "jungian priesthood" was judged by some to be way off the mark-yet I do see a heck of a connection, especially in light of this thread-even down to the "Rewriting" (and claiming copyright) of public entries in wikipedia to fit one's "Religion". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Marie |
| Posted: Tue 12 Apr, 2005 10:26 am Post subject: Poor Platon, scooped by Jung |
|
|
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Posts: 490
|
If my memory does not fail me too much, the concept of archetype takes its origin in Platon philosophy. I always found the idea of archetypes quite similar, philosophically, to geometry. Now, Margreta, do you remember on the moon gardening thread my refernce to Rudolf Steiner, the father of biodynamic agriculture?
Here is an excerpt of one of his lecture (1922)
| Quote: |
| This ancient wisdom contained no contradiction between body and soul or between nature and spirit; because one knew: Spirit is in man in its archetypal form; the soul is none other than the message transmitted by spirit; the body is the image of spirit. |
http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/Places/Dornach/19221225p01.html
There is abook about the history of archetypes I did not read yet:
Jungian Archetypes:
Jung, Goedel, and the History of Archetypes (http://www.goertzel.org/dynapsyc/1996/jung_review.html)
Here is a list of Steiner writings. I would say, it appears the man anticipated Jung profoundly:
| Quote: |
Epistemological writings
Steiner, R. (1894) Die Philosophie der Freiheit - Grundzüge einer modernen Weltanschauung - Seelische Beobachtungresultate nach naturwissenschaftlischer Methode. Rudolf Steiner Verlag, GA 4, 1987. Translated by Rita Stebbing: The philosophy of freedom - a philosophy of spiritual activity - The basic elements of a modern world view - The result of observing the human soul as natural science observes nature. Rudolf Steiner Press, London, 1988. Download the Philosophy of Freedom (Philosophy of Spiritual Activity).
Steiner, R. (1892) Wahrheit und Wissenschaft - Vorspiel einer 'Philosophie der Freiheit. Rudolf Steiner Verlag. GA 3, 1980. Translated by Rita Stebbing: Truth and Science, Rudolf Steiner Publications Inc. New York 1963
Steiner, Rudolf. (1886) Erkenntnistheorie der Goetheschen Weltanschauung. Rudolf Steiner Verlag. GA 2, 1979. Translation by Olin D. Wannamaker: Theory of Knowledge implicit in Goethe's World Conception. Anthroposophic Press, Spring Valley, New York 1968
Steiner, R. (1884-1897) Einleitungen zu Goethes Naturwissenschaftlichen Schriften. Rudolf Steiner Verlag. GA 1, 1987. Translated by Olin D. Wannamaker: Goethe the Scientist, Anthroposophic Press, New York, 1950
Steiner, R. (1904-1923) In 'Philosophie und Anthroposophie.' Rudolf Steiner Verlag, GA 35, 1984. Translated by Harold Jurgens as 'Philosophy and Anthroposophy'. Mercury Press, New York, 1988. Download this article.
Steiner, R. (1897) Goethes Weltanschauung. GA 6. Rudolf Steiner Verlag, Dornach 1990. Translated by William Lindeman as 'Goethe's world view'. Pubs: Mercury Press, Spring Valley, New York, 1985
Steiner, R. (1914) Die Rätseln der Philosophie - in ihrer Geschichte als Umriß dargestellt. GA 18. Rudolf Steiner Verlag, Dornach, 1985. Translated as 'Riddles of Philosophy'. 1973. Anthroposophic Press, Spring Valley, New York
Books directly relevant to natural science
Steiner, R. (1910) Die Geheimwissenschaft im Umriss. GA 13. Rudold Steiner Verlag, Dornach, 1989. Translated by George and Mary Adams as 'Occult Science: An Outline'. 1963. Rudolf Steiner Press, London
Steiner, R. (1904) Theosophie. Einführung in übersinnliche Welterkenntnis und Menschenbestimmung. GA 9. Rudolf Steiner Verlag, Dornach, 1987. Revised translated by M. Cottrell (1954) & A. P. Shepherd (1965): 'Theosophy: An introduction to the supersensible knowledge of the world and the destination of man', Rudolf Steiner Press, London
Lectures relevant to the sciences and approaches to them
Steiner, R. (1920) Geisteswissenschaftliche Impulse zur Entwicklung der Physik I. Erster naturwissenschaftlicher Kurs: Licht, Farbe, Ton - Masse, Elektrizität, Magnetismus. 10 lectures given at Stuttgart, 23rd December 1919 - 3rd January 1920. GA 320. Rudolf Steiner Verlag, 1987. Translated by George Adams as 'First scientific lecture course - Light course. Pubs: Goethean Science Foundation. Reprinted 1977 in 2 volumes for Steiner Schools Fellowship, Michael Hall, Forest Row, Sussex, UK. Distributor: Robinswood Press, 30 South Avenue, Stourbridge, West Midlands, DY8 3XY, UK
Steiner, R. (1920) Geisteswissenschaftliche Impulse zur Entwicklung der Physik II. Zweiter naturwissenschaftlicher Kurs: Die Wärme auf der Grenze positiver und negativer Materialität. 14 lectures given at Stuttgart, 1-14 March. GA 321. Rudolf Steiner Verlag, 1982. Translated by George Adams, Alice Wulsin & Gerald Karnow: 'Warmth course', Mercury Press, Spring Valley, New York, 1988
Steiner, R. (1921) Das Verhältnis der verschiedenen naturwissenschaftlichen Gebiete zur Astronomie. Dritter Naturwissenschaftlicher Kurs: Himmelskunde in Beziehung zum Menschen und zur Menschenkunde. 18 lectures given at Stuttgart, 1st - 18th January. GA 323. Rudolf Steiner Verlag, 1983 (No published translation is available in English. The typescript of a translation by George Adams entitled 'The relation of the diverse branches of the natural sciences to astronomy - 3rd Science Course' is kept at The Library, Rudold Steiner House, 35 Park Road, London NW1 6XT). Download Steiner's 3rd Science Course.
Steiner, R. (1921) Naturbeobachtung, Mathematik, Experiment und die Erkenntnisstufen der Geistesforschung, 8 lectures given in Stuttgart, March 16-23, 1921. Rudolf Steiner Verlag, GA 324. Translated by Walter Stuber and Mark Gardner as: 'Anthroposophy and Science - Observation, Experiment, Mathematics' Pubs: Mercury Press, Spring Valley, New York, 1991
Steiner, R. (1923) Der Entstehungsmoment der Naturwissenschaft in der Weltgeschichte und ihre seitherige Entwickelung. GA 326. Rudolf Steiner Verlag, Dornach, 1977. Translated by Maria St. Goar as 'The origins of natural science'. 1985. Pubs: Anthroposophic Press, Spring Valley, New York & Rudolf Steiner Press, London
Steiner, R. (1920) Grenzen der Naturerkenntnis. 8 lectures given at Dornach, September 27-October 3, 1920. Rudolf Steiner Verlag, Dornach. GA 322. Translated by Frederick Amrine and Konrad Oberhuber as ‘The Boundaries of Natural Science’ (1969). With an Introduction by Saul Bellow. Anthroposophic Press, Spring Valley, New York. 1983.
Steiner, R. (1924) Geisteswissenschaftliche Grundlagen zum Gedeihen der Landwirtschaft. 8 lectures given at Koberwitz, 7th - 16th June. GA 327. Rudolf Steiner Verlag, Dornach, 1984. Translated by George Adams as 'Agriculture'. 1974. Pubs: Biodynamic Agricultural Association, Rudolf Steiner House, London
Steiner, R. (1923) Mysteriengestaltungen. 14 lectures, Dornach, 23rd November - 23rd December. GA232. Rudolf Steiner Verlag, Dornach. Translated by E. H. Goddard and D. S. Osmond as 'Mystery knowledge and mystery centres'. Pubs:Rudolf Steiner Press, London 1973. ISBN 1-85584-061-8.
Steiner, R. (1917) Von Seelenrätseln. GA 21. Rudolf Steiner Verlag, Dornach, 1983.
Steiner, R. (1923) Bees. 8 lectures 3.2.23-22.12.23, Dornach. GA 348. Anthroposophic Press, Hudson, NY.
Beitraege zur Rudolf Steiner Gesamtausgabe, Heft 121: Aufgabenstellungen fuer naturwissenschaftliche Forschungen - Aeusserungen von Rudolf Steiner ueber: Die vier Aetherarten / Elektrizitaet / Veredelung von Torffasern / Radio; Rudolf Steiner Verlag, Dornach. ca. 80 S., h/b., SFr. 18.- / DM 19.- / OeS 139.-, ISBN 3-7274-8121-8; Due for publication Easter 1999. ('The Schiller File' contains indications on the four ethers, electricity, refining peat fibres, radio).
Medical Science
Steiner, R. and Wegman, Ita (1925) Grundlegendes für eine Erweiterung der Heilkunst nach geisteswissenschaftlichen Erkentnissen. GA27 Rudolf Steiner Verlag, Dornach, 9th Ed. 1991. Translated by George Adams as 'Fundamentals of therapy - An extension of the art of healing through spiritual knowledge.' Pubs: Rudolf Steiner Press, London 1967.
Steiner, R. (1924) Meditative Betrachtungen und Anleitungen zur Vertiefung der Heilkunst. GA 316. Rudolf Steiner Verlag, Dornach. Translated as 'Lectures to young doctors' A series of 8 lectures 2-9th January and 5 lectures 21-25th April 1924 given in Dornach. Published as study material only by: The Anthroposophical Medical Association. Copies available from Dr. James Dyson, Park Attwood Clinic, trimpley, Bewdley, West Midlands DY12 1RE.
Steiner, R. (1920) Geisteswissenschaft und Medizin. 20 lectures given at Dornach, 21st March - 9th April. GA312. Rudolf Steiner Verlag, Dornach, 1985. Translated as 'Spiritual Science and Medicine', Pubs: Rudolf Steiner Press, 1975 (Out of print)
Steiner, R. (1922) Physiologisch-Therapeutisches auf Grundlage der Geisteswissenschaft. Zur Therapie und Hygiene. Twelve lectures and additional material given at Stuttgart, 1920, 1922 & 1924. Rudolf Steiner Verlag, Dornach, 1989. Four lectures given in Stuttgart, 26th-28th October 1922 published as 'The anthroposophical approach to medicine'. Pubs: Anthroposophical Publishing Co., 1951.
Steiner, R. (1911) Eine okkulte Physiologie. 8 lectures given at Prague 20-28th March 1911. GA128. Rudolf Steiner Verlag, Dornach. English Title: An Occult Physiology. Rudolf Steiner Press, London, 1983.
Steiner, R. Geisteswissenschaft, Naturwissenschaft, Technik (Public Lecture)
ISBN 3-7274-8107-2
Essays
Steiner, R. (1900) Haeckel and his Opponents
Steiner, R. Mathematics and Occultism, in Archetype, issue 3, September 1997, pp. 46-53 |
* * *
Now, what piss me off is this quote from Jung, the Master himself:
have read a few books by Rudolf Steiner and must confess that I have found nothing in them that is of the slightest use to me. ...
| Quote: |
C.G. Jung on Rudolf Steiner
~ Astrologically: A Leo on a Pisces ~
I have read a few books by Rudolf Steiner and must confess that I have found nothing in them that is of the slightest use to me. ... I am not interested at all in what can be speculated about experience without any proof. All the ideas that Steiner advances in his books you fan also read in the Indian sources.
I have read a few books on anthroposophy and a fair number on theosophy. I have also got to know very many anthroposophists and theosophists and have always discovered to my regret that these people imagine all sorts of things and assert all sorts of things for which they are quite incapable of offering any proof. I have no prejudices against the greatest marvels if someone gives me the necessary proofs. Nor shall I hesitate to stand up for the truth if I know it can be proved. But I shall guard against adding to the number of those who use unproven assertions to erect a world system no stone of which rests on the surface of this earth. So long as Steiner is or was not able to understand the Hittite inscriptions yet understood the language of Atlantis which nobody knows existed, there is no reason to get excited about anything that Herr Steiner has said.
- C.G. Jung in a letter to M. Patzelt on November 29, 1935
|
What is to roll myself on the floor is that at least Steiner influenced some very down to earth practices such as in agriculture....
Last edited by Marie on Tue 12 Apr, 2005 10:38 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Marie |
| Posted: Tue 12 Apr, 2005 10:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Posts: 490
|
Steiner, Rudolf. (1886) Erkenntnistheorie der Goetheschen Weltanschauung. Rudolf Steiner Verlag. GA 2, 1979. Translation by Olin D. Wannamaker: Theory of Knowledge implicit in Goethe's World Conception. Anthroposophic Press, Spring Valley, New York 1968
Jung mentions of Goethe date, as far as I know, from his 1930 essay Psychology and Literature.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| opal |
| Posted: Tue 12 Apr, 2005 2:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 324
|
So, who did coin the term "archetype" originally? And coining the term doesn't mean creating the idea -- I remember reading Hillman who traces archetypal imagery back through Henri Corbin and Jung to their predecessors: "...particularly the Neoplatonic tradition via Vico and the Renaissance (Ficino), through Proclus and Plotinus, to Plato...and most anciently to Heraclitus. (Corbin's works on Avicenna, Ibn' Arabi, and Sohrawardi belong also in this tradition as does the work of Kathleen Raine on William Blake...and on Thomas Taylor, the English translator of the main writings of Plato and the Neoplatonists.)" [From 'Archetypal Psychology]
Now, I don't know the works of many of those people indicated by Hillman, but I thought I remember reading somewhere that Corbin was using the term 'archetype' before Jung - I don't know if Hillman claims the author of the term, exactly, but I thought that *he* thought it wasn't Jung. (?)
I was interested to read your post, Margreta - as I'd never heard of Sabina Speilrien's unpublished doctorate thesis - is it published now? what did Jung draw from her?
And of course the little "copyright" deception employed by Matthew was cunning. I don't know. What I read makes me skeptical. And I just haven't read enough Jung to gather real perspective. Maybe I could add another verse to the Joni Mitchell song: "I really don't know Jung at all."
opal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Marie |
| Posted: Wed 13 Apr, 2005 8:34 am Post subject: etymology |
|
|
Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Posts: 490
|
Hello Opal,
This morning I checked it up and here, from the online dictionary of etymology:
| Quote: |
| idea: 1430, "figure, image, symbol," from L. idea "idea," and in Platonic philosophy "archetype," from Gk. idea "ideal prototype," lit. "look, form," from idein "to see." Sense of "result of thinking" first recorded 1645. |
archetype comme from the greek word archetypos which means: model, original blue print of a thing etc...
So, as I mentioned earlier the term archetype really takes its roots in Platonic philosophy. But it was served at the Jung sauce. The point I want to make is that it seems that Steiner had redefined 30 years earlier than Jung the concept in its current psychanalytic meaning.
But here, some illiminating quotes:
| Quote: |
(1) In Jungian psychology an archetype is not considered to be an innate idea. "What above all stultifies understanding is the arrant assumption that 'archetype'means an inborn idea." Rather, "archetypes are typical forms of behaviour which, once they become conscious, naturally present themselves as ideas and images." C.G. Jung, Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche, 2nd edition (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969), p. 226. It has been claimed that "Jung's concept of the archetype is in the tradition of Platonic Ideas." Andrew Samuels, et. Al., A Critical Dictionary of Jungian Analysis (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986), p. 27. However Ken Wilber, the well-known author of works on Transpersonal Psychology, concludes that "the Jungian archetypes are not the transcendental archetypes or Forms found in Plato, or Hegel, or Shankara, or Asanga and Vasubandhu. These latter Forms—the true archetypes, the ideal Forms—are the creative patterns said to underlie all manifestation and give pattern to chaos and form to Kosmos. . . .The Jungian archetypes, on the other hand, are for the most part the magico-mythic motifs and 'archaic images'. . .collectively inherited by you and me from past stages of development, archaic holons now forming part of our own compound individuality (they come from below up, not from above down). And coming to terms with these archaic holons—befriending and making conscious and differentiating/integrating these prototypes—is a useful endeavor, not because they are our transrational future, but because they are our prerational past." Ken Wilber, Sex, Ecology, Spirituality: The Spirit of Evolution (Boston: Shambhala, 1995), pp. 247-48.
http://www.prometheustrust.co.uk/Meadow_2/Greek_Philosophical_Terms/greek_philosophical_terms.html
|
| Quote: |
Weldon, J. (2004). The Platonic Roots of Analytic Psychology: The Archetype of the Self and the Subtle Body of Soul (Doctoral dissertation, Pacifica Graduate Institute, 2004).
The dissertation is a theoretical study examining the parallels between Platonic philosophy and Jungian psychology, the Platonic self and Jung’s archetype of the self. Plato identified the self as double, a dual-unity of the divine and human. Dual-unity defmes the two as the same, yet different. They are brought into unity through the development of the subtle body of soul, considered by Plato as “the third.” The subtle body of soul, in a third ontological category between the divine and sensory-based ego, is the true individual self. Using a hermeneutic method, the author discovered that Jungian psychology is rooted in many facets of Platonic philosophy, and that Jung develops the Platonic double self of a “third” individual subtle body of soul unifying the divine God-image and the personality complexes. His archetype of the self is therefore a dual unity, referred to in the study as the dialogic archetype of the self. Developed through the philosophic life in Plato, and individuation and the transcendent function in Jung, the subtle body of soul is a differentiated organ that provides for psycho-spiritual structure and function. Chapters of the study describe the psycho-spiritual phenomenon of soul’s subtle body in the author’s experience, Plato’s Dialogues, Plotinus’ Enneads, Henri Corbin’s eastern Platonism, and Jung’s Collected Works. The fundamental identity between Platonic philosophy and Jungian psychology is brought out prior to the explication of the self as subtle body of soul in both systems. The last chapter describes a method of analytic psychotherapy based on the subtle body of soul as the developing self, and its role as the essential healing agent.
http://www.online.pacifica.edu/pgl/stories/storyReader$735
|
So...I still think Steiner should be given more credit, or at least re-examine... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Azazel |
| Posted: Wed 13 Apr, 2005 10:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 08 Apr 2005
Posts: 3
|
To Jerome, on the Jung Page.
Going the 'PM Route'.
"I am going to stick with the 'truth' as I see it Jerome. It may cause me to lose in the short run, but in the long run I will win.
The only way for the Jung Page to get well is to allow precisely that open conversation. It keeps wanting to happen, and you fellows keep shutting it down. You say you want it to 'go forward', and you do exactly what will keep it 'back' and 'behind', and you will not listen to what people are telling you.
Proactive moderation=Sweeping out the garbage and keeping the 'Opals' from 'shitting on the furnature'. I am not the sort to recommend behavior, and in fact I am not attached any longer to Jung Page because my FEELINGS tell me it was lost long ago---but I do think it would help if you looked a little closer at 'reality'.
"Complaining of a restrictive/paranoid environment is an opinion that you feel a need to provoke? This is going to help the atmosphere, all in the name of free speech and truth... so you can foment a continuous loop of past issues? and I must continue to deal with that instead of moving the Forum ontowards better?"
What helps the atmosphere is when things are dealt with openly, and the issues are 'resolved'. What leads to octaves of sickness is attempting image-management, and whitewashing, and all this fake BS that is going on.
It is the end of the line for me Jerome. I have thought and thought about it and I don't see an alternative.
The place itself, the people who run it, or perhaps the central psychology around which it is built, demonstrate flaws that are not solutionable. 'You' don't get it, you can't get it, but we who come at Jung from the critical angle are trying to HELP.
But 'you' do not want this.
So, you get your way---you push away that which arises, and that means it will simply manifest in some other corner, come popping up from some other hole.
I predict: 'You'll see'..
Anyway, I hope you will save my email address. It would be nice to hear from you from time to time.
Seriously: I can't deal with the sickness. To 'pretend' it is not there, or is found in 'Opal', is to perpetuate it.
My suggestion is to open the conversation, and let it heal. Obvioulsy that cannot happen while Matthew 1) has the power he has, and 2) dominates and directs the conversation. And 3) that you 'cooperate' in this.
That is what I think....
_______________________________
GJ, who comes to LaingSociety under the name of a convenient Jewish social device. Hey, it worked then.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Renee |
| Posted: Wed 13 Apr, 2005 10:42 am Post subject: Urge for going |
|
|
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 183
Location: Mother Earth
|
Good morning, y'all....
It seems to me our efforts to understand Jung (and his Platonic understanding of archetypes) must also include ontological (the nature of the knowable) and epistemological (the nature of the relationship between the knower and the known) concerns.
Jung was in the historical context of a post-positivist paradigm - that reality could be objectified - quantified - measured, etc. Even though the contents of the unconscious cannot be "proven" except by way of the dreamer's explication of it - there is a belief that a "reality" exists "out there" or "inside self" that can be defined (such as the reality of archetypes).
Consider where "science" is today:
Constructivism, which considers knowledge/reality as a human construction
Postmodernism, which doubts that any discourse has privilege over another or that there is one, universal truth - the belief in multiple realities that we construct as individuals
Poststructuralism, which states our realities are created through discourse - and is concerned with the relationship of institutions, power, and subjectivity.
Critical postmodernism, poststructuralism or feminist poststructuralism offer hope that understanding and transformation are possible through DIALOGUE (individual and collective).
Jung did not live in this world.....He wasn't concerned with gender inequity - how he perpetuated the existence of a patriarchal society with his use of language (ala "man" being used for "human being" - [and look at how much work there is to do with language ALONE!]) or definitions of the nature of the psyche or power relations. Although his ideas, theories, experience pointed towards a more fluid understanding of all this - the idea of "personal myth" - he was what he was, and lived when he lived, and THAT, of course, we cannot change.
What we CAN do now is take feminist poststructuralist approaches (as many of us do here) to understanding our world and our relationships in it, and evolve and integrate the concepts Jung and others introduced (and continue to introduce). And by doing that, we become acutely aware of continued gender inequities - which are as close to home as JungTalk - and make a choice about how to "right" them.
For me that meant leaving JungTalk....Deal me out....
(Opal, I was thinking of a Joni tune yesterday, too:
She's got the urge for going,
So I guess she'll have to go,
She gets the urge for going,
When the meadow grass is turning brown,
All her empire's falling down and winter's closing in.)
I don't know where all of you live, but it's frickin' springtime around here....time to clean out the brown and brittle and bring in the new....
"....I came upon a child of God,
He was walking along the road;
And I asked him, where are you going
And this he told me
I'm going on down to Yasgur's farm
I'm going to join in a rock'n' roll band
I'm going to camp out on the land
I'm going to try an' get my soul free
We are stardust
We are golden
And we've got to get ourselves
Back to the Garden"
jammin' with joni's "hits" this AM....
~R |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Renee |
| Posted: Wed 13 Apr, 2005 10:54 am Post subject: The Schopenhauer Cure |
|
|
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 183
Location: Mother Earth
|
Hi GJ - welcome back....
And another thing....a brief aside....Irvin Yalom has masterfully created a fiction (bibliotherapy being his recent way to "spread the word" about how psychotherapy is evolving into these post-modern spheres) called The Schopenhauer Cure. There's lots to talk about in this book - but I thought I'd mention that Schopenhauer's mother hung out with Goethe after her constraining and controlling husband finally committed suicide. (Since Goethe has been mentioned, I thought I'd toss this in.....It's a great read about group dynamics and the effects of the presence of "Arthur Schopenhauer" in a modern-day growth group.)
~R |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| opal |
| Posted: Wed 13 Apr, 2005 1:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 324
|
Thanks, Marie, for the Steiner quotes. I don't know very much about him other than the name, but I picked up a book some time ago by John Allison: A Way of Seeing: Perception, Imagination, and Poetry, and Allison quoted Steiner throughout, particularly regarding his exercises of self-knowledge. It really resonated with me at the time - I'm going to have to go back and re-read it (as I'd intended because once isn't enough for such a beautiful book). I think I looked for Steiner on the Web, so I'll try to track down some of his writing that way. Here is something from Allison's book of Steiner's that as you say references archetypal experience:
| Quote: |
The essence of metaphor derives from the activity of what Rudolf Steiner has called the Sentient Soul. Humanity as a whole developed this Sentient Soul in the dawn of historical time; before about 3,000 BC, as sentient beings were immediately responsive to our sense impressions, perceiving all their immediate relations as presented. In these impressions we also experienced spiritual beings -- the gods, we say -- fully integrated with the things about us. We did not have to connect things; they did not even have to connect themselves in our consciousness, for in reality they were already pre-connected, and we saw them thus. Something is something else. Then, writes Steiner in his Anthroposophical Leading Thoughts:
A far-reaching change takes place with the unfolding of
the Sentient Soul. The manifestations of the Divine through
the senses grows dim and fades away...
[A man] now perceives the world from two sides: through
sense-impressions from without, and through spirit-
impressions of an ideal kind from within...
He is filled from within with a sense-free spirit-content--
itself an image of the contents of the world.
Metaphor connected these two experiences... |
And moving to your point, Renee. (Hi, Renee! ) - science, imo, is hitting its ceiling. The scientific model can't possibly contain all experience. And - Laing has told me - experience itself isn't everything but is conditional and relative. So...I'm waiting to see what comes next, but I'm not interested in just "interiors" as Jungians are so fond of, and even many so-called post-Jungians. The poet Rilke had mastered the art of inner reflection but not until he was able to look deeply into the Other did his gift open all the way. Two paradigms - well, now with Laing, three, really drew my attention away from endlessly falling inner reflection: ecopsychology and phenomenology (also Bachelard's "phenomenology of the imagination").
Both are mused upon in Allison's book, and what so resonated for me was Keats' idea of Negative Capability and Rilke's call to "seek the depth of things". Another quote from Steiner in Allison's book describes this beautifully:
| Quote: |
| to look out on the world with keen, healthy senses, and quickened power of observation, and then give ourselves up to the feeling that arises within us. We should not try to make out, through intellectual speculation, what the things mean, but rather allow the things themselves to tell us. |
To this predominately feeling-type girl, these words were a homecoming and a release.
Happy Spring, everyone 
luv, opal
Last edited by opal on Wed 13 Apr, 2005 1:46 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| opal |
| Posted: Wed 13 Apr, 2005 1:24 pm Post subject: For the saints with no domain... |
|
|
Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 324
|
Welcome home, GJ (what we may all yet create    !!!)
I was sorry things escalated to the point they did at JF - sorry for my part in the pain. Not that I wouldn't say what I did if I had it to do again - I'm *very* outspoken and never could keep quiet. The public bannings felt like public executions - reminding me of that childhood story: and the goblins will get you, if you don't watch out... I couldn't sit demurely in the enforced group-think. Herd consciousness: Matthew's order for the New Generation.
Maybe Jerome will tire of it and appear here. I hope the rifts between people heal, and I'm happy to see you again - you were missed.
The cool & soothing tradewinds have returned to Hawaii. Again, happy Spring to all.
aloha, opal
"Grandfather
Look at our brokenness.
We know that we are the ones
Who are divided
And we are the ones
Who must come back together."
~Ojibway prayer |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
