We probably had it on the old forum, but that can’t be replied to.

Father of a nonsense belief system centered on the collective unconscious, a magical realm of ideas (archetypes) that underlie all human understanding. Later, to preserve his career in the Nazi era, states that Jews do not share the same collective unconscious as Aryans.

Crap, I say.

It's pseudoscience of course (most psychology is), Jung wrote a certain type of literature more than anything. Doesn't mean there's nothing to it. After all, there are only like 7-12 types of stories to be told in the (our) world. These two ideas, "number of archetypes and number of stories," could be related, in the world of literature especially. Literature has applications in the real world.

Crap with waffles for the ideas.

Sometimes it's like Jung took one thing Aristotle said and just fuckin ran with it.

Crap because psychoanalysis.

EDIT: At my local grocer there is a non-alcoholic wine by the name of "Jung", and that, to me, is bloody hilarious.

I think he made some interesting contributions which no one would call science. I'd put him in with William James, Aldous Huxley and Alan Watts as a kind of western intellectual who found occidental thinking to have limitations and so entertained a lot of mystical thinking as an alternative perspective.

Just like with dreams you don't go into that stuff looking for capital T "Truth".

losthighway wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 2:09 pm I think he made some interesting contributions, don't go into that stuff looking for capital T "Truth".

Trimmed to basically state what I feel. Not Crap. because "Magic", and Psychoanalyses are both Not Crap

losthighway wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 2:09 pm I think he made some interesting contributions which no one would call science. I'd put him in with William James, Aldous Huxley and Alan Watts as a kind of western intellectual who found occidental thinking to have limitations and so entertained a lot of mystical thinking as an alternative perspective.

Just like with dreams you don't go into that stuff looking for capital T "Truth".

I don't know much about James, but I would say Huxley and Watts were pretty harmless. Even Freud's crapola gave us a little bit of good literary criticism and the ridiculousness of Lacan, whose writings are on the level of a lifelong Andy Kaufman bit. The inheritors of the Jung lineage are Jordan Peterson and the new age charlatans who fused his fancies with Gurdjieff's hypnotism.

biscuitdough wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 8:37 pm The inheritors of the Jung lineage are Jordan Peterson and the new age charlatans who fused his fancies with Gurdjieff's hypnotism.

Oof, I don't know if you can pin that prick on Jung, as much as he'd appreciate the association.

You can probably thank Jung for Joseph Campbell. So Jung invented Star Wars. I'm calling it.

Fascinating man, lots of deeply interesting work.

The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious and The Red Book were mind blowers in my early 20s.

Mined a kind of thought that is currently very unfashionable amongst the "educated" classes but has universal appeal - ideas of vast, limitless horizons of connection and meaning that go beyond our little experiences in our little part of the world. This esoteric fare allows you to read a lot into it if you want to, so it's catnip for the disaffected. Jung's scale and scope (and, IMO, humility as an explorer of ideas) was much greater than most who wandered down this path.

NC

losthighway wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 10:06 pm So Jung invented Star Wars. I'm calling it.

Settled!

biscuitdough wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 8:37 pm
Just like with dreams you don't go into that stuff looking for capital T "Truth".

I don't know much about James.
[/quote]

William James was a diplomatic, pussified version of Nietzsche.

I had a therapist when i got divorced and she asked me to talk about my dreams. I put a stop to that straight away.

The world is filled with "magic." We just can't prove it.