[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 120 KB, 1178x1600, Carl-Jung.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16201108 No.16201108 [Reply] [Original]

I've heard of his work for a while but can't quite grasp it.

>> No.16201110 [DELETED] 

>>16201108
>What's so fascinating about C.G.Jung?
nothing

>> No.16201130

Aion will kick your fucking ass. Go try it.

>> No.16201196

>>16201108
He is the culmination of all the years Germans were trying to understand the mind since Leibniz (though he is less autistic and more refined as a Swiss). I am even inclined to say he *finished* psychology; everything else you might add is either superfluous or false. Hearing about his work second hand won't do it OP. It's somewhat subtle and nuanced. You have to read him very carefully. A background in German philosophy and art would also be very helpful.

>> No.16201214

>>16201108
>I've heard of his work for a while but can't quite grasp it.
Try reading them, retard

>> No.16201368

>>16201108
He is a powerful mystic

>> No.16201494

eloquent schizo

>> No.16201881

>>16201108
Try reading Man and his Symbols, instead of hearing what second sources think of him.
It's an enjoyable read, a book made for laymans (us), you'll have a great time.

>> No.16201885

>>16201108
He's been debunked

>> No.16201932

>>16201108
Dude of course you can't grasp Jung without fkin reading him

>> No.16202650

>>16201196
Not OP but can you add anymore? I don't know anything about psychology other than its meaning has evolved into an applied science with dubious results...

>> No.16202676

>>16202650
Look what happened to you. Dubious as a baby in the ghetto at night selling weed.

>> No.16202680

>>16202650
I could add more if you told me what you wanted to know. Jungian psychology is very different from modern psychology. Its effectiveness has also been empirically proved by some recent studies.

>> No.16202863

>>16202680
Isnt analytical psychology more philosophy than actual psychology?

>> No.16202897

>>16201108
He's a metaphysician larping as a psychologist

>> No.16202907

ITT: people who have not read Jung or understand psychology talk about Jung and psychology with surprising amounts of earnest conviction

>> No.16202911

Is Jung just Freud for white people?

>> No.16202925

>>16202863
That's a weird question since it entirely depends on how you characterize philosophy and psychology (despite all efforts, there isn't a universally accepted definition for them).
Analytical psychology is a *psychology* insofar as it concerns itself with *only* the mind, and nothing else (i.e., no metaphysics or ethics). The basis of the theories are also empirically originated (which means no deductive arguments), and the whole discipline is committed to not just understanding the mind, but also applying this understanding to achieve psychological health and growth. In these regards it's a full psychology.
However, it takes a very holistic stance towards the psyche and deals with areas of the mind that modern psychologists think is out of their reach. Jung is also very philosophically educated so the influence of various philosophers could be seen in his works. In these aspects it has similarities to philosophy. Though all things considered, I'd say we should ultimately regard it as a psychological school (albeit perhaps a more philosophically oriented one).

>> No.16202931

A worse William James

>> No.16202937

>>16202911
I didn't know Freud was reserved for the negroes.

>> No.16202944

>>16202937
He was the original "muh dik muhfugga."

>> No.16202953

>>16202925
Thanks for clarification. Do you think jungian psychology is still relevant with the rise of behaviorism and farma treatment?

>> No.16203005

>>16202953
I think it's even more relevant since those disciples fall short of analytical psychology in some respects. Ultimately what a pharmaceutical treatment does is to artificially suppress the symptoms. While the actual psychological problem is there, it removes the biological indicators. It's akin to taking painkillers. Regarding behaviorism, psychology is a unique scientific field since we have access to our minds not just from the outside, but also from inwards by reflection, which could inform us to construct better theories/hypotheses. If these theories then prove useful (say in therapy), what difference does it take if it came from subjective reflection? In this way I believe behaviorism is needlessly shortsighted. Jungian psychology goes one or two steps beyond those two disciplines, considering that it also focuses heavily on the process of psychological growth, which is absent in modern psychology.

>> No.16203059
File: 1.08 MB, 1551x1115, jung.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16203059

Jung's theories are a lot more comprehensive than modern day psychological theories and therapies. His theory of the archetypes and the collective unconscious draws from evolutionary psychology and attempts to explain our very own subjective experiences and unconscious processes.

His theories are very relevant at this moment in time. He explains how Religions rise from the collective unconscious and is essentially something we can't rid ourselves of. Instead we've replaced it with ideology. Jung's concepts of the persona, the shadow and the anima/animus also help understand a lot of what is happening with individuals in our time. Jung explores why 'broken' individuals are drawn to cult-ish, ideological leanings and how different world views crash and polarize the population.

He also goes on to explain how the individual can shield himself from such dangerous unconscious influences and instead grow and mature into a more authentic agent in their lives.

If you want to grasp Jung, I'd start with Man and His Symbols followed by Modern Man in Search of a Soul

>> No.16203141
File: 178 KB, 1080x1440, Screenshot_20200618-145153_Mimi.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16203141

>>16201108
I'm reading the forgotten language by Fromm because I want to dive into Jung, he seems pretty based.
I'll post the chart.

>> No.16203266

>>16203005
>>16203059
thank you /lit/

>> No.16203271

>>16203059
>grow and mature into a more authentic agent in their lives
how?

>> No.16203275

Seems like hes enlightened or no?

>> No.16203278

>>16203275
Oh wait no, hes not, mybad

>> No.16203288

>>16203275
He is.

>> No.16203292

Why is he always so smug?

>> No.16203301

>>16203292
Come on anon. If you are at the top of human intellectual ladder, you deserve to be at least a little smug. At least he isn't as bad as Nietzsche.

>> No.16203303

>>16201108
He has a talent for making his crackpot spiritualist ideas sound scientific

>> No.16203305

>>16203288
Nah, his secret is some time part in abundance of psychoactive substances.

>> No.16203309

Jung is good but his analysis only goes so far to explain the conscious mind's understanding of the subconscious rather than anything deeper. It's to gain an understanding of him through say Pocket Jung then start reading the likes of Lacan. Chomsky calls Lacan a charlatan but honestly, Jung's efforts to polarise and divide yourself into a "shadow self" has evidently caused a great wound in modern thinking. I like Jung as what I consider "artistic psychoanalysis" but Lacan's concept of the mirror self is much less problematic.

>> No.16203312

>>16203305
That makes him to be 16 years old.

He was quite advanced on spiritual path, but still prettu far away from zen.

Catch this, most people dont even have 0 age.

>> No.16203313

>>16201196
>He is the culmination of all the years Germans were trying to understand the mind since Leibniz
No he is not, Leibniz was an actual philosopher, Jung was a charlatan selling pseudoscience

>> No.16203327

>>16203309
Anon you have not even an introductory knowledge of Jung, so you aren't in a place to shill a charlatan instead of him. The Shadow is just an abstract/archetypal representation of the moral problem introduced by Nietzsche, and is a very basic and introductory part of Jungian thought. The real polarization is between the conscious and the unconscious, which is a basic premise in every psychoanalytic school.

>> No.16203329

If you ever feel tempted to suppose that /lit/ is a more sophisticated board than /x/ always remember we have people here who take Jung's scizobabble seriously

>> No.16203335

>>16203327
There is no "unconscious" stop being retarded

>> No.16203336

>>16203327
But I said exactly that. The problem with the shadow is that it is abstract in it's own concept and archetypal, whereas Lacan's belief in the mirror self encompasses the very flaw in human psychology that made Jung create such a contrivance. Symbolism in itself is a reductive practice by humans, and if anything is the main practice of Religion is the symbological. The very issue with Jung is that his entire philosophy is "So you've realised there's no god, now let's try and mindhack yourself into being religious despite this contradiction" and is exactly the kind of dualistic madness now being explained in novels like American Psycho.

>> No.16203340

>>16201196
Jung is Catholicism lite with a lot of babbling

>> No.16203403

>>16203271
Through exploring your unconscious processes;
>Complexes
How your upbringing and life influences your 'framing'/worldview. Past traumas and experiences give you a sort of bias towards certain things, depending on what constitutes said complexes
>Shadow
What do you hate about yourself? About other people? What personal characteristics might be underdeveloped in your self? For example, someone that despises all forms of aggression is flawed, as they won't be able to 'use' aggression even in situations where it would be appropriate.
>Persona
We all have various forms of personas - our role and identity shifts in accordance with the context we are embedded in. Someone with a lot of complexes will be drawn towards 'roleplaying' certain personas, behind which they can hide their flaws. The persona is a social mask that is essential to the functioning of our society, but one can also become possessed by it. Start to believe they actually are who they pretend to be. See trans and left- and rightwing larpers on social media. You should strive to be AUTHENTIC TO YOUR SELF, not hide it behind a polished persona.

Personas can also limit your possibilities of growth and maturity, as in a sense you are defining your self to be a specific someone through labels. It restricts your potential of becoming something more.

>Anima/animus
Your unconscious 'stereotype' of the opposite gender.

>>16203336
>"So you've realised there's no god, now let's try and mindhack yourself into being religious despite this contradiction"
To me it seems that Jung makes the point that religions (and ideologies) fulfill the purpose of situating ourselves in a narrative that is essential for us to orient ourselves in the world and motivate us to action. The collective unconscious is our evolutionary inheritance which has given rise to all forms of symbolism (which we also can't rid ourselves of). Embracing the collective unconscious (becoming 'religious') is a better play than to pretend we're entirely rational.

>> No.16203416

>>16203403
Can you fuse with negative persona as in some sort of anti-narcissism?

>> No.16203445

>>16203005
>considering that it also focuses heavily on the process of psychological growth, which is absent in modern psychology.
If by "modern" you actually mean roughly the 1900-1960's period of psychology, then I might agree with you, but in contemporary psychology the positive psychological school, which advocates for personal growth, has been gaining ground all the time. Previously psychologists aimed at getting a malajusted person back to society as a functioning human being, but these days the aim is to prevent such a turn of event in the first place by encouraging ppl into healthy habits of the mind.

>While the actual psychological problem is there, it removes the biological indicators.
I agree with you, but I just have to say that in contemporary psychological treatment they're starting to combine the pharmaceutical treatment with cognitive behavioral theraby, the latter of which - if you really think about it pragmatically - doesn't fall far from Jungian analytic psychology, since it concerns itself with our habits of thought, but perhaps not on as fundamental a level as Jung (it merely cuts the symbolic and occultic parts from the equation and leaves you with the idea of changing patterns of thought and structures of meaning).

>>16201885
Citations needed.

>>16203059
>His theory of the archetypes and the collective unconscious draws from evolutionary psychology
Didn't evolutionary psychology as a field come decades later Jung had published his core corpus?

>> No.16203497

>>16203416
I'm not sure what you mean by 'negative persona'. Personas are dependent on the social context, and we can not rid ourselves completely from them. A persona isn't a bad thing by definition, it is the exaggerated personification with it that is unhealthy. Many people try to overcome their own faults by 'fusing' with a persona. According to Jung, that's essentially fleeing from your problems rather than confronting them (which would allow for the individual to overcome them).

>>16203445
It did, but the theory of evolution is (as you know) far older. Freud was very much influenced by it but drew different conclusions than Jung.

>> No.16203503

>>16203445
>>16203497
Didn't realize I'd written 'evolutionary psychology' in my original post. My bad.

>> No.16203521

>>16203445
>these days the aim is to prevent such a turn of event in the first place by encouraging ppl into healthy habits of the mind
While I acknowledge that positive psychology was a great step for modern psychology, this type of growth is not what I was referring to concerning the Jungian framework. That growth is a spiritual, almost pan-religious process. Happiness and growth as conceived by positive psychology is very rudimentary compared to last stages of Jungian individuation.
>I agree with you, but I just have to say that in contemporary psychological treatment they're starting to combine the pharmaceutical treatment with cognitive behavioral theraby
I'm not necessarily against modern psychology. I just think its reductive approach misses the forest for the trees. In the end, I believe a neo-Jungian movement that integrates the new findings of psychology (including the CBT, even the pharma, and everything else) to the Jungian framework would prove extremely effective. It's a shame it hasn't been done yet.

>> No.16203684

>>16203503
>Didn't realize I'd written 'evolutionary psychology' in my original post. My bad.
That's okay. At least the misconception has now been cleared.

>>16203521
> a neo-Jungian movement that integrates the new findings of psychology
That sounds like fun on a bun, but I think that we're going to have to wait for such an integration for a while. And if it comes, I'm inclined to believe that the necessary adhesive comes outside the field of psychology. I just don't see the connection between neurons and brain chemicals on the one hand and concepts and archetypes on the other, other than that words are interpreted in some way and then the biological responses kick in, but this is me just spitballing at this point.

>> No.16203755

>>16202937
He is reserved for jews

>> No.16203803

>>16203497
A negative persona like believing your much worse than you really are.

>> No.16203843

>>16203755
Universalism is a mistake. One of the reasons we're so fucked up is because jewish therapy for jewish mental issues was mass applied to western people, who usually don't have disruptive oedipal complexes in the same degree jews have them.

>> No.16203882

>>16203803
Well, Jung describes the process of individuation as being the integration of unconscious processes into your being whilst also shedding excessive personas in order to become a more mature and 'whole' in-dividual. To take on a persona in order to cover over perceived faults in your self (for example narcissism, which you mentioned) is just a band-aid fix to a deeper problem.

Jung's concept of 'inflation' (which is quite similar to narcissism, if not the same thing) is perceived to be the result of excessive identification with a persona.

>> No.16203894

Jungian anons, sorry for the off topic question, but I'm wondering, is Goethe's Mephistopheles the same as the ancient god Wotan? Has Jung said anything about their relation?

>> No.16203905

>>16201110
Came to say.
>>16201108
If it was anything its that so many pseuds are convinced he has anything original or insightful to contribute.

Psychology was a fucking disaster

>> No.16204239

>>16203894
On second thought, I think Faust himself might be Wotan. Any thoughts?

>> No.16204262

>>16203882
I wonder if its possible to go through individuation without any external help if you're repressed neurotic.

>> No.16204937

>>16202897
This desu

>> No.16205022

>>16201108
The phenomenology of myth

>> No.16205045

>>16203141
I'm currently reading Becker, and he references Fromm a lot. It seems to me that Fromm cleaned up Freud's theories and brought them out of their infancy stages. How is he so far?

>> No.16205058

>>16203059
You don't read modern psychological theories, do you anon ?

>> No.16205127

>>16205058
I'm interested in modern psych theories. got some author recs?

>> No.16205216
File: 99 KB, 519x781, carl schmitt.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16205216

>>16203292
He got advice from the guy who made Nazi Germany legal.

>> No.16205218

>>16203335
Your dreams are a direct contradiction to that incredibly ignorant claim.

>> No.16205227

>>16205127
Depends on what kind of theory you're interested in.
Mainline psychoanalysis has been more popular these days, mostly because of the Lyon School of psychoanalysis. Authors like: René Roussillon, Albert Ciccone, André Green, Jacques André, Johann Jung, Anne Brun. They mostly focus on a more nuanced approach to psychoanalysis which blends with modern research (The Inter-subjective, The double, reflexivité, etc.)

Some anons showed interested in Self Psychology which is a rework of psychoanalysis. If thats your case, just read Heinz Kohut.

On the neuropsychology side of things, Allan Schore published impressive work on the neurological basis for why psychology works, especially long term treatment.

Theres more, but thats what i got, at the moment.

>> No.16205230

>>16205216
What? I've never heard the two of them associated

>> No.16205243

>>16205230
My bad it turns out I shouldn't read wikipedia pages while high. Ernest Junger was who I was thinking about.

>> No.16205245

In the same boat OP. Planning on picking up The Portable Jung compiled by Joseph Campbell

>> No.16205253

>>16203445
>Citations needed.
Why? Look it up yourself, you're clearly in love with him.

>> No.16205269

>>16205227
Thanks for the recs! I'll definitely be looking into some of those. Got any for social psych?
Specifically neuropsychology applied to group dynamics?

>> No.16205272

>>16201881
do I need any background before start reading Jung?

>> No.16205299

>cock and ball torture
>some jrpg game (can't even play the first two because I don't know Japanese)
>have to find an architect to become a good person
Now just how am I supposed to do all this!?

>> No.16205302

>>16205272
Memories, Dreams and Reflections is an excellent start as it ties in his biography and theory.

>> No.16205308

>>16205058
I do, though I guess I put it in a weird way. What I meant by 'more comprehensive' was that Jung's theory is a lot bigger in scope than most popular contemporary theories. Was primarily thinking about the behaviorism offshoots as that is what I'm mostly surrounded by in uni.

The names you mention here >>16205227 I'm not really familiar with, except Kohut.

>> No.16205313

>>16205272
None for Man and His Symbols. Ideally knowing a little of Freud will help because he's in part reacting to him, but it's a mistake to put off reading the lay-audience stuff just to study Freud. Worry about background if you decide to move on to the heavy stuff.

>> No.16205332

>>16201196
>though he is less autistic and more refined as a Swiss
kek

>> No.16205356

>>16205127
Not >>16205227 , but I would at least add Dan P. McAdams who is part of the standard curriculum in my uni. He has researched things related to narrative psychology, and he tried to bring integrative life stories, character adaptations (e.g. coping mechanisms) and The Big Five under one model.
Costa & Mccrae made contributions to the big five model, so those are ppl you could look up.

Then there's Donald Winnicott and Lev Vygotsky, but I don't have any experiences with them, although they've been on my to-read list for a while now. Especially Winnicott's Playing and Reality is something I'm dying to get the time to read at some point.

If you want a general overview into contemporary field of psychology, I guess Atkinson and Hilgard's Introduction to Psychology would do the trick.

>> No.16205364

>>16205269
Haven't seen the neuropsychological works on social psych (I'm more interested in clinical work). That being said, the systemic approach might interest you, since it heavily focus on group dynamics. Not an expert on the approach so you might want to search for yourself, but Gregory Bateson and the Palo Alto school were influencial in this type of approach. Take this with a grain of salt, since Palo Alto is an old framework and the systemic approach might have evolved into something more diverse.

>> No.16205396

>>16205253
> Look it up yourself, you're clearly in love with him.
I sure am, but that's beside the point. The problem is that when I google "Jung debunked", I get all kind of reddit-tier tripe which gives me no reason to change my attitute towards him. If you had a credible author in mind, I could at least go read it myself, but as it currently stands, those who're criticizing him are just a bunch of shit-tossing internet trogdolytes.

>> No.16205409

>>16205308
>Was primarily thinking about the behaviorism offshoots as that is what I'm mostly surrounded by in uni

That surely makes more sense. Behaviorism and cognitive clinical works gets mostly a bad reputation because it was pushed by insurance compagnies and productivity focused managers. It could surely learn from more abstract approachs (Although it kinda did with 3rd wave TCC).

>> No.16205423

>>16205364
>>16205356
Thank you both! I appreciate it.

>> No.16205466

>>16205308
>The names you mention here >>16205227 (You) I'm not really familiar with, except Kohut.

Sadly, most of the authors mentioned in the Lyon School of thought are mainly published in french, which makes sense since psychoanalysis is very much alive in Europe or Canada. If you're interested in them, you could try your luck, some books were published in english.

>> No.16205526
File: 178 KB, 998x768, 1567867876722.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16205526

>>16205466
Yeah, I tried looking them up but mostly found articles written in gibberish. I did find a lot of Schore's work and 'The Greening of Psychoanalysis'. If you've read it, would that serve as an introduction to what you called the Lyon school?

While psychoanalysis might be very much alive generally in Europe, it sure doesn't feel like it here in Sweden.

>> No.16205604

>>16205216
Carl Schmitt was innocent (innocent until proven guilty).

>> No.16205656

>>16205526
>I did find a lot of Schore's work and 'The Greening of Psychoanalysis'. If you've read it, would that serve as an introduction to what you called the Lyon school?

Schore's work is on the neurological basis of early development, mostly the regulation and disregulation of affects. He's not part of the Lyon School. You might want to begin by reading on the Paris psychoanalytic school. No need to know much, its just to help you find authors more prevalent in the current meta. Jean Bergeret, André Green and Christian David might have more work adapted in English. If that dosent work out, you might consider searching for other authors who are more prevalent in the english canon like Winnicott, Otto Kernberg, Heinz Kohut.

>> No.16205676

Thanks anon!

>> No.16205693

>>16205396
You write like Chris Langan.

>> No.16205780

>>16205693
How so? Too pretentious, or... ?

>> No.16207016

>>16201108
Schizo but still extremely based.

>> No.16208138

>>16201494
6th post best post

>> No.16208303

>>16205356
>>16205364
Just dropped ~$80 on a combination of these authors. They were exactly who I was looking for. Thanks!

>> No.16208490

>>16208303
Oh, nice! What did you buy?

>> No.16208518

>>16201108
He was friends with Miguel Serrano

>> No.16208543

>>16202897
these

>> No.16208566

>>16208490
Human Nature by D.W. Winnicott
Steps to an Ecology of Mind by Gregory Bateson
Thought and Language by Lev S. Vygotsky
Social Neuroscience : People Thinking about Thinking People by Cacioppo
Home Is Where We Start From : Essays from a Psychoanalyst by D.W. Winnicott
The Social Neuroscience of Empathy Edited by Jean Decety

>> No.16208660

>>16208566
Really interesting looking list. Hope you'll have a good time reading those :)

>> No.16209728

>>16205218
>Your dreams are a direct contradiction to that incredibly ignorant claim.
A dream is a conscious state, what are you talking about.
You can be unconscious in the case of a dreamless sleep, but the point is that the Unconscious with capital U, like in Jungian psychoanalysis, is completely made up.

>> No.16209753

>>16209728
Very bold to never even read Freud and act like you know the contextual meaning of unconscious.

>> No.16209855

>>16209753
You don't need to read psychoanalytic tomes to know a simple definition of the term unconscious. You are just deflecting to durr surely you misenderstood because there is no way one can defend what is obviously pseudoscientific claims.

>> No.16210140

>>16209855
>You don't need to read psychoanalytic tomes to know a simple definition of the term unconscious
I don't, but you do.

>> No.16210618

bump

>> No.16210650

>>16201108
post more rare merchants

>> No.16211597

>>16210650
But he's not a jew

>> No.16211644

>>16211597
Yeah, if anything he was a nazi in denial.

>> No.16211735

>>16211644
>in denial
Lol

>> No.16211766

>>16211735
He literally went back on his support for the Nazis later on in life.

>> No.16211781

>>16211766
>went back on his support for the Nazis later on in life.
citation needed