Jung thread

[Anonymous No.17596972]

Was he a true genius, or just a schizo?
What are his most important books? Where do you go after reading him?

[Anonymous No.17597085]

>>17596972
>Where do you go after reading him?

The deepest reaches of your mind.

[Anonymous No.17597109]

Both Jung and Freud (more like Fraud amirite) were schizos who shouldn’t still be allowed to be memes in this day and age. Even when I was 15 and read their shit I thought, “what a load of crap!”

[Anonymous No.17597119]

>>17597109
Are you being sarcastic or just trying to be funny

[Anonymous No.17597122]

>>17597119
I’m being fully serious

[Anonymous No.17597126]

>Was not one of the most important points of Jung’s theory already to be found here: the force of ‘questioning’ in the unconscious, the conception of the unconscious as an unconscious of ‘problems’ and ‘tasks’? Drawing out the consequences of this led Jung to the discovery of a process of differenciation more profound than the resulting oppositions.
Was he right?

[Anonymous No.17597274]

>>17597126
I read it three time but didnt understand what he said.

[Anonymous No.17597289]

both

[Anonymous No.17597481]

>>17597289
based

[Anonymous No.17597585]

>>17597274
Highlight of my dreary day to have made me laugh

[Anonymous No.17598047]

bump

[Anonymous No.17598543]

>>17596972
>Jung
>the pic is old

[Anonymous No.17598609]

What should I read after Man and His Symbols?
Is it necessary to read his more technical, psychiatry-oriented books in order to understand the rest?

[Anonymous No.17598629]

>>17597126
wut

[Anonymous No.17598634]

>>17597109
I used to think this too but after reading both I can say Jung has some decent ideas on developing yourself. It's just that it's very subjective, therefore cannot be broadly applied yet that is what his disciples try constantly. He's also pozzed because of his company, although he had some decent takes (Wotan). Freud is a fraud though.

[Anonymous No.17598827]

>>17598634
How the fuck is Jung pozzed

[Anonymous No.17598850]

>>17598609
Once you read it and know the terminology of his, the reading order doesnt really matter as long as Red Book is the last read on Jung.

[Anonymous No.17598915]

>>17598850
>as long as Red Book is the last read on Jung.
Why? What about the Black Books?

[Anonymous No.17598933]

>>17598827
He was surround by globalists who influenced his thought. He had immense white guilt and felt Europeans had to sacrifice themselves in order to redeem the "mistakes" of their ancestors.

[Anonymous No.17598960]

>>17598933
"The psychoses of Negroes are the same as those of white men.
In milder cases the diagnosis is difficult because one is not sure whether one is dealing with superstition.
Investigation is complicated by the fact that the Negro does not understand what one wants of him, and besides that is ignorant [does not know his age, has no idea of time].
He shows a great inability to look into his own thoughts, a phenomenon that is analogous to resistance among our patients.
Little is said of hallucinations, and equally little of delusional ideas and dreams. — The Negro is extraordinarily religious: his concepts of God and Christ are very concrete.
The lecturer has pointed out on an earlier occasion how certain qualities of the Americans (for instance, their self-control) may be explained by their living together with the (uncontrolled) Negroes.
In the same way this living together also exerts an influence on the Negro.
For him the white man is pictured as an ideal: in his religion Christ is always a white man.
He himself would like to be white or to have white children; conversely, he is persecuted by white men.
In the dream examples given by the lecturer, the wish or the task of the Negro to adapt himself to the white man appears very frequently.
One is struck by the large number of sacrificial symbols that occur in the dreams, just as the lecturer has mentioned in his book Wandlungen und Symbole der Libido.
This is yet another indication that such symbols are not only Christian but have their origin in a biological necessity. "

"Just as every Jew has a Christ complex, so every Negro has a white complex and every American a Negro complex.
As a rule the coloured man would give anything to change his skin, and the white man hates to admit that he has been touched by the black.
Now for the facts. What about that American laughter? What about the boundless noisy sociality? The pleasure in movement and in stunts of all sorts? The loose-jointed walk, the Negroid dancing and music?
The rhythm of jazz is the same as the n’goma, the African dance.
You can dance the Central African n’goma with all its jumping and rocking, its swinging shoulders and hips, to American jazz.
American music is most obviously pervaded by the African rhythm and the African melody.
It would be difficult not to see that the coloured man, with his primitive motility, his expressive emotionality, his childlike directness, his sense of music and rhythm, his funny and picturesque language, has infected the American “behaviour.”"

Is this pozzed?

[Anonymous No.17598987]

>>17596972
>Where do you go after reading him?

Unironically back to Plato.

[Anonymous No.17599020]

>>17598960
>With these words I should like to draw the reader’s atten-tion to the main difficulty he has to face. The horror whichthe dictator States have of late brought upon mankind is noth-ing less than the culmination of all those atrocities of whichour ancestors made themselves guilty in the not so distantpast. Quite apart from the barbarities and blood baths per-petrated by the Christian nations among themselves through-out European history, the European has also to answer for allthe crimes he has committed against the dark-skinnedpeoples during the process of colonization. In this respect thewhite man carries a very heavy burden indeed. It shows us apicture of the common human shadow that could hardly bepainted in blacker colors. The evil that comes to light in manand that undoubtedly dwells within him is of gigantic pro-portions, so that for the Church to talk of original sin and totrace it back to Adam’s relatively innocent slip-up with Eve isalmost a euphemism. The case is far graver and is grosslyunderestimated.
I don't know, you tell me

[hungryman !!5BI0oSV9uvS No.17599040]

>>17596972
>Where do you go after reading him?
Nowhere; for the first time, after individuation, shadow integration, etc, you’re here for the first time.

[Anonymous No.17599045]

>>17598987
What for?

[Anonymous No.17599053]

>>17596972
In my mind when I meet God it's Carl Jung

[Anonymous No.17599127]

>>17598915
Red book is the magnum opus of his.
Also
>"The text of The Red Book draws on material from The Black Books between 1913 and 1916. Approximately fifty percent of the text of The Red Book derives directly from The Black Books, with very light editing and reworking. The "Black Books" are not personal diaries, but the records of the unique self-experimentation which Jung called his ‘confrontation with the unconscious’. He did not record day to day happenings or outer events, but his active imaginations and depictions of his mental states together with his reflections on these. The material which Jung did not include in The Red Book is of equal interest to the material which he did include."

[Anonymous No.17599131]

>>17596972
I see so many bullshit philosophy youtube channels posting videos about Jung that I'm getting sick of it. Jung is a coke junk schizo. Read Nietzsche if you want to change your life

[Anonymous No.17599156]

>>17599131
Nietzsche didn't write anything about the unconscious or esotericism

[Anonymous No.17599184]

>>17599131
>>17599156
Evola is who you really want.

[Anonymous No.17599192]

>>17596972
>>17597109
Schizo has really become the bullshit psued insult lately.

[Anonymous No.17599198]

>>17599184
Why?

[Anonymous No.17599240]

>>17598543
If you really want your mind blown, Paul Newman has been dead for over a decade

[Anonymous No.17599241]

>>17599156
And for a good fucking reason. Psycho analysis is schizophrenic rambling about nothing. It's a shit cope, it has no use outside of academics.

>omg i wanna fuck my mum so bad. i guess everyone wants to do it

Yeah good luck with that

[Anonymous No.17599248]

>>17599241
>schizophrenic
Thanks for letting me know I should disregard everything you say

[Anonymous No.17599265]

>>17599198
He went on where Nietzsche ended. Nietzsche correctly identified the issues with our modern age, Evola proposed how to fix them. His greatest criticism of the übermensch and related ideas is that it has no metaphysical grounding to build from, that is why Tradition is necessary. Also his most striking criticism of Jung is that Jung fails to make the distinction between the subconscious and the superconscious, which allows for grave misinterpretation and even danger for the individual in forms of disintegration and abuse by third parties.

[Anonymous No.17599268]

>Was he a true genius, or just a schizo?

[Anonymous No.17599270]

>>17599248
Thanks for letting me know you're a deranged lunatic.

>BUT MUH ARCHETYPE

Fuck off and keep coping

[Anonymous No.17599274]

>>17599270
yeah yeah cry more

[Anonymous No.17599278]

He just came back into vogue after Jordan Peterson started name-dropping him.
Basically if your into Jung right now you're probably a low calibre person who needs to tidy his room

nb

[Anonymous No.17599280]

>>17599265
Which of Evola's books are worth reading on this subject? I'm not particularly interested in tradition itself, I got into Jung because I want to become aware of and get in touch with my unconscious.

[Anonymous No.17599291]

>>17599278
I never watched a single video from Peterson nor read a single book he wrote, I barely even know who he is outside of the wash your penis meme

[Anonymous No.17599334]

>>17599280
Revolt Against the Modern World is the foundation of all his other works, but it's quite dense. It also assumes you're somewhat familiar with Old World history, religion and mythology. It's very good though, it just filters a lot of people here. Guenon's Crisis of the Modern World is similar and shorter and also an option but I prefer Evola's Revolt, it goes much deeper and wider.
If you don't mind slightly cringy youtube videos, this series is about the book and explains Evola's take on Tradition decently enough: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zD5B8P2wUbA..
>I got into Jung because I want to become aware of and get in touch with my unconscious.
Jung is decent for that, but I think having read Evola helps mitigate the risks and see the things Jung overlooked (due to a lack of time and resources).

[Anonymous No.17599361]

>>17599334
Thanks.
>having read Evola helps mitigate the risks and see the things Jung overlooked
It's not like they wrote on exactly the same subjects.
How methodical is Evola? Does he provide tangible instructions for practice or is he only a theorist?

[Anonymous No.17599452]

>>17599361
They did though, Evola wrote on many different subjects from esotericism to politics, mythology, philosophy, metaphysics and symbolism. But I meant his criticisms towards Jung and psychoanalysis in particular. If you want that specifically, he wrote about it in an upcoming book titled The Fall of Spirituality, but also touches on it in Revolt.
>How methodical is Evola? Does he provide tangible instructions for practice or is he only a theorist?
It depends on what you mean by methodical. He is, especially for his time, very well-read throughout various disciplines and languages, and is very precise in his writing. He takes examples of both eso- and exotericisms from various traditions and looks for their underlying structures. He has also written on spiritual (Hermetic Tradition, Introduction to Magic), mental (Ride the Riger), and political practice (Men Among the Ruins, Orientations) but I wouldn't read those until after you've read Revolt, which is more theoretical.

[Anonymous No.17599483]

if he didnt exist, american self-help authors would have to invent him to have a quotable authority other then traditional religions, when dealing with cultural questions other than pure efficiency.

[Anonymous No.17599495]

>>17599452
What were Evola's metaphysical beliefs in a nutshell? Whenever I see him brought up on /lit/ nobody actually mentions that.
>It depends on what you mean by methodical.
I mean, does he give actual practical techniques and solutions, or does he stay in the realm of pure theory (like Guenon from the little I've read of him)?

[Anonymous No.17599533]

>>17599495
>What were Evola's metaphysical beliefs in a nutshell? Whenever I see him brought up on /lit/ nobody actually mentions that.
Take a look at that video I posted here>>17599334, that's a decent enough explanation. In short, he believed, like Guenon, that all forms of tradition/religion/spirituality were expressions of the same universal truth bound to a particular place and time. Since we live in the Dark Age (the period at the end of a cycle) we are in spiritual disarray, and he proposes personal action to overcome this. That's also the difference between him and Guenon, Evola was oriented towards action while Guenon was towards contemplation. It's more nuanced than that but you get the gist.
>I mean, does he give actual practical techniques and solutions, or does he stay in the realm of pure theory (like Guenon from the little I've read of him)?
Yes, that's in those books I mentioned at the end of my previous post. But Revolt is necessary to understand them and is mostly theoretical.

[Anonymous No.17599534]

>>17597126
Yes

[Anonymous No.17599540]

>>17599533
Thanks, I'm gonna check him out.

[Anonymous No.17599605]

>>17599540
Good to hear. You could also check out the books by Raido (Handbook of Traditional Living), they're very short an the first half of the first book is a decent summary of the ideas from Revolt Against the Modern World. The second half and the second book give actionable advice. They're not by Evola himself, but by more recent adherents of his ideas, but I think Evola would endorse most of it.

[Anonymous No.17599761]

>>17599605
One thing that I found interesting in the video you posted was the idea that traditions are inherently corrupted because the laws of the material world distort the truths they attempt to convey. Was Evola pushing for a rediscovery of true tradition through personal exploration unhindered by modern religious biases?

[Anonymous No.17599797]

>>17596972
I curse Peterson to hell everyday for ever popularizing this piece of actual excrement

[Anonymous No.17599844]

>>17597126
A literal word salad

[Anonymous No.17599887]

>>17599761
Yes to some extent, it depends on the path and the individual. For some people this is the way, but for most people some form of religion is necessary to convery these truths symbolically. So he refers to many traditions to give examples but also clarify the underlying universal structure as much as possible. But he believed you need some sort of metaphysical grounding to make sure you're not fumbling in the dark (which is what he said of psycho-analysis).

[Anonymous No.17600048]

>>17599887
>For some people this is the way
Does he expand on which types of people can afford to go on a solitary journey in Revolt, or does that come in other books?
He said psychoanalysis was bad because it had no metaphysical backbone? But it aims to analyze the individual solely through psychology, it's not a mystical process (according to Freud and Lacan at least). As for Jung, I don't know if it's really fair to say he has "no metaphysical grounding" since he can be called a perennialist for all intents and purposes.

[Anonymous No.17600279]

>>17599844
You're joking right?

[Anonymous No.17600454]

>>17596972
>Was he a true genius, or just a schizo?
He was both

[Anonymous No.17600577]

>>17600048
>Does he expand on which types of people can afford to go on a solitary journey in Revolt,
Yes he does
> it's not a mystical process (according to Freud and Lacan at least)
But Evola thinks to communicate with/interpret the sub/superconscious is, and therefore to dabble in it without that metaphysical backbone is very dangerous. And also the fact that it only accounts for the conscious and sub-conscious, while Evola asserts we can either ascend or descend, and psychoanalysis makes no distinction.
>As for Jung, I don't know if it's really fair to say he has "no metaphysical grounding" since he can be called a perennialist for all intents and purposes.
In some ways yes, in other was he was more of a modern christian mystic. I think that, like Nietzsche, he intended well but did not have the time or resources to dig into traditional metaphysical interpretation as Evola did, and he sadly started building his own ideas on the shoulders of Freud instead which makes for very shaky grounding. I think Jung definitely has some useful ideas, though.

[Anonymous No.17600592]

>>17597109
>Even when I was 15 and read their shit I thought, “what a load of crap!”
You've posted this before, and if you were incapable of seeing the value in Jung (there is also an historical value in Freud, but it's not a litmus test like Jung is because the honest reaction to Freud is what you say) then you were literally just a silly 15 year old with no guess as to whether the "mystical" designates something meaningful in his life.

[Anonymous No.17600595]

I think he was just an academic with too much free time.

[Anonymous No.17600599]

>>17600577
>very dangerous
In what ways?

[Anonymous No.17600654]

>>17600599
Well look at what Jung had to overcome in his own journey for example. An ordinary man could not have done that, but would have easily become lost in such a state and never recover. Evola also warns about negative occult forces which one can fall prey to if you open yourself up to the non-conscious without properly knowing what you're doing. I think Jung intuited many things correctly, but his core issue is the subjectivity of his method.

[Anonymous No.17600684]

>>17600654
Isn't that mostly a question of mental strength, i.e. being able to hang on while confronting darker forces and not lose yourself?
I think Jung considered those negative forces to be mostly contained within the individual and therefore that it was an inner battle first and foremost.
By subjectivity do you mean his method is not widely applicable? Jungian analysis, integration of the shadow and other concepts are quite universal.

[Anonymous No.17600707]

>>17600654
Does Evola give instructions on how to engage safely with the occult? I've been interested in yoga but there's some spooky shit to be found there allegedly

[Anonymous No.17600739]

>>17600684
>Isn't that mostly a question of mental strength, i.e. being able to hang on while confronting darker forces and not lose yourself?
Yes, but most people don't have such mental strength. Look at the mental state of your average person currently.
>I think Jung considered those negative forces to be mostly contained within the individual and therefore that it was an inner battle first and foremost.
Yes and Evola disagreed there, they were not only individual but there were outside of us the Gods, but also other "entities" for lack of a better word, that prey upon the mentally weak, just like in previous times we would call someone "possessed".
>By subjectivity do you mean his method is not widely applicable? Jungian analysis, integration of the shadow and other concepts are quite universal.
I mean that the interpretation is subjective. Like I said I think Jung intuited many things correctly, but not all, and I think Evola has a much stronger grounding from universal concepts from religions/traditions all over the world. Plus, Evola also accounted for differences between individuals, he was somewhat elitist in that he did not believe every person was born equal.

[Anonymous No.17600762]

>>17600739
>they were not only individual but there were outside of us the Gods
This seems to me like a matter of interpretation, whether you consider the path to be internal or external. I tend to prefer the former interpretation but I'm open to other views.
>he did not believe every person was born equal.
Did he believe this was irremediable or that people of lesser ability could reincarnate as better individuals or whatever?

[Anonymous No.17600763]

>>17596972
a little of both. aion. where you should have been before: the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament

[Anonymous No.17600769]

>>17600707
Yes he does in his more spiritual books such as The Hermetic Tradition and the Introduction to Magic series. He has also written books on Hinduism and Buddhism where he touches upon those specifically but I've heard mixed opinions about those.
There's also an upcoming translation of The Fall of Spirituality which deals explicitly with the dangers of occult practices and false forms of spirituality. But for all of those goes, it helps to have read Revolt Against the Modern World so you better understand where he's reasoning from.

[Anonymous No.17600782]

>>17600769
Evola didn't live long enough to engage with New Age thought did he?
>Hinduism
Are you referring to "The Yoga of Power"?

[Anonymous No.17600836]

>>17600762
>This seems to me like a matter of interpretation, whether you consider the path to be internal or external. I tend to prefer the former interpretation but I'm open to other views.
I guess, he explains it better than I could, but he's not infallible either, I just think he hits the mark more often than Jung. The advice is to read him and see what makes more sense.
>Did he believe this was irremediable or that people of lesser ability could reincarnate as better individuals or whatever?
It's not better but different. He refers a lot to the traditional caste system in India or the European middle ages as examples. (Clergy, nobility, craftsmen, labourers.) Every person is born part of a caste/class and does best if they maximize their potential within that class. But in our current Dark Age the lines are very blurred and mobility is somewhat more possible (though that's not necessarily a good thing). What separates the first three castes I mentioned from the last one for example is that the former are dvija, twice-born, meaning that they have a greater innate capacity for higher spirituality. But they have to cultivate it, so he thinks a labourer who has cultivated his inner self is better than a priest who has not done so.

[Anonymous No.17600840]

>>17600836
Does he say if people can somewhat figure out their "spiritual caste", or does he use the classification mostly in a metaphorical way to point out that people have varying aptitudes towards spirituality?

[Anonymous No.17600851]

>>17600782
>Evola didn't live long enough to engage with New Age thought did he?
He did, he died in the 70s, he criticizes New Age spirituality in that book I mentioned, since it's partly born out of the theosophy movement which he was familiar with but very much disagreed with.
>Are you referring to "The Yoga of Power"?
Yes, and the other one is The Doctrine of Awakening (Buddhism). There's also East & West which are essays also dealing with those topics among others.

[Anonymous No.17600865]

>>17600851
Did you read the yoga of power? Why is it controversial?
I'm not really into buddhism

[Anonymous No.17600878]

>>17600840
Yes he does but not along a set template, he explains how he feels that he is part of the warrior caste (warrior does not mean only physical war, also metaphysical) while someone like Guenon is of the priestly caste. He explains in detail what each caste entails in Tradition and says that most people will feel an innate resonance to one of those even if the systems are no longer in place.

[Anonymous No.17600895]

>>17600878
This is all quite interesting. I hope I'm not gonna get filtered by Revolt.

[Anonymous No.17600915]

>>17600865
Yes some time ago so I can't remember that well. I think it's mostly his book on Buddhism that's controversial but I've seen some posts here claiming Yoga of Power is also wrong in some regards, but I think it's because he only looks at one specific branch of Hinduism instead of it as a whole. But I've also heard positive things about it and I thought it made sense, but it's not exactly my area of expertise so do with that what you will.

[Anonymous No.17600939]

>>17600895
Glad to hear it, if you take the time and read carefully, look up concepts you're not familiar with and tackle the second half of the book with an open mind you'll probably do fine. The videos from that series I linked are also helpful for background and explanation, each episode goes over one chapter but they haven't reached the end yet.

[Anonymous No.17600943]

>>17600939
Alright, thanks for the advice

[Anonymous No.17600949]

>>17597126
>>17597274
>>17599844
>t.brainlet

[Anonymous No.17601473]

>>17600949
Yes.

[Anonymous No.17602785]

>>17596972
He's just a typical European obsessed with occultist crap. Don't waste your time.

[Anonymous No.17602892]

>>17597109
>Even when I was 15 and read their shit I thought, “what a load of crap!”
and now you're 16

[Anonymous No.17602927]

>>17597109
Based as fuck. Effeminate /lit/ pseuds SEETHE at this.

[Anonymous No.17602939]

>>17596972
Genius, with a bit of madness. Honestly not that much though, if you read his later work especially you can tell he's pretty grounded

[Anonymous No.17603074]

>>17596972
>Was he a true genius, or just a schizo?
An autistic midwit with incoherent structure or purpose.

[Anonymous No.17603141]

>>17597274
>>17598629
>>17599844
Americans really find this hard to read? He's just praising Jung's differentiation of the unconscious because it aligns with his "problem-solving" philosophy and his mechanistic view of the unconscious

[Anonymous No.17603198]

>>17597122
>>17597109
even i can identify his ideas in my subconcious

[Anonymous No.17603202]

>>17603141
That was posted during Euro times, so probably ESLs

[Anonymous No.17603246]

>>17603202
>having timezones memorized so you can identify euro and american hours
take your meds and go back to /int/