> Related Resources > Carl Jung / Robert A. Johnson
  #1  
Old 04-11-2004, 04:57 PM
Default Robert A. Johnson's, Ecstasy ...
Excerpt from Robert A. Johnson's, Ecstasy, Understanding the Psychology of Joy ...

Quote:
Communicating with Our Unconscious

When a myth transcends mere storytelling and truly comes alive for us, we experience deep psychological understanding. By learning to identify these archetypes and understand them as processes at work within ourselves, we can make real personal change. When we begin to understand myths on this deep level we open up communication between our conscious and unconscious selves, gaining important insights and enriching our lives.

How do these two very different selves communicate? Jung once observed that the ego has the same relationship to the collective unconscious as a cork does to the ocean on which it floats, with one important exception: The ego has consciousness. It can make a dialogue with the unconscious. In this dialogue we can begin to make a step on the journey toward wholeness.

If we intend to rejoin our unconscious and conscious selves, we must accord them equal respect. We do not need to "kill" our egos, or repress the energy of the archetypal forces. We simply need to try to understand them in our own unique way.

According to Jung, the ego has a great and important task: to help integrate the conscious and unconscious realms into a unity. It is not the fate of the ego to drown in the sea of the unconscious; neither is the ego destined to drain the sea, as if it were a bathtub, and rule over all. When we give equal honor to waking reality and mythic reality, we can truly begin to understand and know ourselves.
__________________
So when the body dies, and consciousness departs, where do "we" go? ... Off to define another "reality" perhaps?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-11-2004, 09:27 PM
Default
Nice writing. I think it would be a nice framework for literary criticism. So are Jung's writings. Wonderful stuff; it just irks me, though, when people call this stuff "psychology" and try to use it as a scientific authority for existance of and characteristics of consciousness. It is not psychology, it is psychoanalysis, which is more accurately termed a pseudoscience (see Terence Hines, "pseudoscience & the paranormal" for a chapter on psychoanalysis--briefly, its unfalsifiability is what renders it pseudoscience).

I am not saying that you are making that claim. You made no claim whatsoever, and just presented the quote without comment. The thread had to go somewhere...
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-14-2004, 12:10 AM
Default
Without a soul, where is the experience of life? In which case I find the work of Jung and Johnson to be right on! This is where science fails miserably, because it can't accept the transcendency of the soul, and won't get past the notion that consciousness is merely the by-product of electro-chemical processes in the brain. Which, is why so many people take offense to it, as it tends to take the humanness out of the equation.
__________________
So when the body dies, and consciousness departs, where do "we" go? ... Off to define another "reality" perhaps?
Last edited by Iacchus32 : 04-14-2004 at 12:12 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-14-2004, 02:29 PM
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iacchus32
Without a soul, where is the experience of life? In which case I find the work of Jung and Johnson to be right on! This is where science fails miserably, because it can't accept the transcendency of the soul, and won't get past the notion that consciousness is merely the by-product of electro-chemical processes in the brain. Which, is why so many people take offense to it, as it tends to take the humanness out of the equation.
I have no soul, and yet I experience life. I take no offense to science; I take offense to just-so-stories that pretend to explain great mysteries but which in fact are just (sometimes extremely well-written) fiction. To quote (or perhaps paraphrase) Teller, "scientists are every bit as interested in the big questions about life, the universe, and everything; we just don't want made-up answers."

You like Jung and Johnson because they agree with your world-view, not because there is any evidence whatsoever that they are right. If there was any, I am certain you would be the first to post it here.

Reality is under no obligation to bow to our offended pride.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-07-2004, 04:23 PM
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digital Cuttlefish
I have no soul, and yet I experience life. I take no offense to science; I take offense to just-so-stories that pretend to explain great mysteries but which in fact are just (sometimes extremely well-written) fiction. To quote (or perhaps paraphrase) Teller, "scientists are every bit as interested in the big questions about life, the universe, and everything; we just don't want made-up answers."

You like Jung and Johnson because they agree with your world-view, not because there is any evidence whatsoever that they are right. If there was any, I am certain you would be the first to post it here.

Reality is under no obligation to bow to our offended pride.

Where you are depends on the path you took,
and what you find depends on how you look.
__________________
Once you find your way, you're there.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-09-2004, 04:15 PM
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grace
Where you are depends on the path you took,
and what you find depends on how you look.
This is actually quite good. In fact it suggests something very empirical (although others may not be able to agree) about the nature of self-discovery.
__________________
So when the body dies, and consciousness departs, where do "we" go? ... Off to define another "reality" perhaps?
Reply With Quote
Reply