What a beautiful mind and I can assure you he had to face some things we ,or I, would consider anything but beautuful to become the man we see here. Thanks for the video
This man was a genius before his time, also nobel prize winner! Carl Jung's work helps a lot to explain and shatter the ignorance of the sheeps and explain a lot of "hocus pocus" superstition.
Too many people now don't even bother to actually read his studies and expect to be spoon fed the information. I especially enjoyed his theory on "Synchronicity" in relation to "random sampling".
2 people were too lazy to read his works and expected to be spoon fed like a baby.
@Wolfsbane909 me too. It is so nice to see that I am not alone in what I call knowing and being true to ourself.(myself) Static is where most of us believe because of fear. I love your comment
After watching the "Face to Face" interview, I am only just beginning to understand the extent of Jung, and I am starting to realise that he was far more than his contributions to psychotherapy and psychology.
I think if Jung had been from Asia or the Indian sub-continent, he would have been considered 'divine' - a spark of Braman.
He is certainly one of Europe's more blessed gurus and his comments on the nature of man are almost poetic, but plainly chilling at the same time.
@QuantumProphet A quantum leap maybe. It is not a contest I don't believe. I know this is not what you were saying but it is an observation that I agree with.
I didn't understand what exactly did he mean when calling "having visions of the future" as facts, and how exactly is psyche not bound to the confinements of reality. can anyone explain?
"One thing is sure, a great change of our psychological attitude is imminent, that is certain, because we need more psychoogy, we need more understanding of human nature, because the only real danger that exists is man himself, he is the danger, we are pitifully unaware of it! We know nothing of man! Far too little!"
He was so right on... man is the only great danger.. I often think of his quote: "The mind of man can create an Armageddon.." Thank you for posting this..
After readingand listening, i must say this, Jung, nor any of his predecessor cant be define as right or wrong. Him, just like Copernic and others, opened a door to new possibilities, new way of see things. By doing so, they have contributed in many ways in the advancemet of our society, some were good, some were wrong.
Also, sounds creates frequency, colors does, oil has a frequency, so has the moon...so why not our thoughts???
Delta Range - 0.5 to 4 HZ (associated with deep sleep)
Theta Range - 4 HZ to 8 HZ (seen in dreaming sleep, and other mental states where the mind is wandering, like daydreaming and imagining)
Alpha Range - 8 to 13 HZ (relaxed but awake)
Beta Range - 13 HZ to 30 (??) HZ (normal awake state/aware)
Gamma Range - 30 (??) HZ to 60 (??) HZ (associated with consciousness - the brain stops producing gamma waves when we're put under for anaesthesia, for example)
@juresaiyan Both say not only that all dreams have meaning, but invariably have more than one meaning. By not defining an upper limit, "more than one" means infinite. That claim does not make sense, and has no foundation. Both played into contempmorary dream interpretation chic, thereby setting themselves up as dream gurus.
@Geko2006 You deal in extreme dont you LoL No one has been offended, everyone come up with opinions and share them. Its called having a "debate of ideas". Since anyone i read in this forum claimed to own the absolute truth, Darell, just like yourself, our entitled to share ideas from their own personal experience. Like einstein said "Its all relative" aint it? What i saw and felt in my life build my system of beliefs, like all of us.
"As the world becomes more technically efficient, it seems increasingly necessary for people to behave communally and collectively. Now do you think it's possible that the highest development of man may be to submerge his own individuality in a kind of collective conscienceless." around 8:00 listen to the answer because the question describes pretty much what the internet is. Pretty scary huh?
Carl Jung concludes that collective history of mankind reflects itself in dreams.So we see fearful dreams due to historical events of second half of last century.But he has missed a positive side of human nature.Those are human being who are struggling to stop future world war.Perhaps this character of humanity was unknown to Jung.
@directorazeem Of course he also sees the positive side. In fact his whole lifetime was dedicated to analyse the psyche of men, to understand the state of mind that couses problems like war. He clearly quotes that the real problem of agression, war, etc. lies in side the spyche of men and that's why the psyche should be studied intensly to prevent further wars from emerging. That's a pretty positive struggle to stop world war, if you ask me !
@etiennealive It's one thing if Jung claims to be an expert on what causes war, man's inhumanity towards man, and the existence of evil . That is the macrocosm: the big picture. It's quite another when he practices psychiatry, i.e. one on one counseling with a client. That is the microcosm. It's not a good mix. The result is that Jung looks for and creates a problem in the client where there is none. Aslo, the client is intimidated from the outset. A good psychotherapist stays neutral.
@Darrell861 Well, of course he's a psychotherapist. And unfortunatly, war sometimes is created in some of us who aren't clients. Just turn on the eight o clock news. I didn't say I aprove all of his method's.
I think macrocosmos war is created by each individual microcosmos war, wich emerges in each personal psyche. It's just so that people with the same thoughts often form a group.
@directorazeem Here's the collective unconscious internet: On p.59-60 (ff) of Man and His Symbols Jung presents a case study of the dream diary of an 8-year-old girl. She had never opened a Bible, yet had a dream which depicted a passage from the Bible. This means that a Lithuanian potato farmer in 1450 could have the same dream. A 12-year-old in Indonesia could have the same dream. Anyone not familiar with Moby Dick could have a dream about a captain in search of a whale. Jung's nonesense.
@directorazeem It is not the psychiatrist's job to stop future war. Psychotherapy is not a crusade. It is the psychiatrist's job to take each case on its own terms. Jung regarded all dreams as an indication of a problem. He never gave a case study of a dream which was simply a dream. Even a happy dream. By being so pre-occupied with war and man's inhumanity toward man, he used psychiatry to use scare tactics and create problems where there were none. This is a typical guru technique.
@directorazeem Last night i dreamt I was in Florida, making my way down two sandy peninnsulas, trying to get back where I started, come upon a small tent which is a helicopter stand, I pick up a small but flyable dark off-green helicopter, I carry it down the beach, come upon small eatery. I enter, the owner's daughter is seated in an otherwise empty place. Now. I fail to see what my dream has to do with the collective history of mankind, still less than war. Comment?
Carl Jung concludes that collective history of mankind reflects itself in dreams.So we see fearful dreams due to historical events of second half of last century.
So true. People use cliches like Guns kill people, Money is the root of all evil. Bullshit. Guns/money don't think or act- people do. People are the ones manipulating these things.
Thanks for posting this gem of an interview which makes the apparent fact the more apparent that today's world sorely needs such serious, profound men, and women, as C.G. Jung to help us survive, which we can only do by progressing with our conciousness on the path of self-realization, rather than falling into the abyss of social, cultural, psychological and environmental destruction. Why then doesn't the world listen enough? Perhaps the answer is: not enough yet.
@Homerus I agree. Jung was a genius. So is Dr. Phil. Both are experts at fooling people. Both are pathological liars. Both make blanket staements about the human condition. Both come up with their own pet theories of psychological types. Both of them have no regard for ethics in the licensed practice of psychotherapy. Around 1907 Jung started claiming he had the ability to interpret dreams, and incorperated that claim into his private practice. That is absurd and unethical.
@Darrell861 You sound like you are conditioned to a very dogmatic way of thinking, in which Jung's theory & Dr. Phil's theory (which stam from ancient principles, and are not in any way their own, simply interpretations or simplifications for the public) have no place.
Who are you to say that Jungs claim is absurd and unethical, what is your evidence for these claims, or are you just throwing around insults without any consideration of their meaning?
@Homerus Introversion and extraversion do not stem from ancient principles. They were invented by Jung in 1921, CW6. Jung based the distinction on his subjective analysis of the literary styles of two writers, Tertullian and Origen, who lived over 1500 years before Jung was born. Dr. Phil''s internalizer, externalizer and chance people are loosely based on Jung's inventions, and do not stem from ancient principles. Several other pop psychologists have invented their own psychological types.
@Darrell861 Introversion and extraversion are merely words to describe ones character, the characteristics were always there, Jung did not invent introversion and extraversion, maybe he thought up those words, and analyzed the behaviour, but that's all he did. As far as I can see and read, both Jung & Dr. Phil are dedicated to helping others, by making unhappy or unbalanced people aware of the true nature of reality. I see the beauty in that.
@Homerus Jung and Dr. Phil are not referring to unbalanced and unhappy people. They are making blanket statements about all people: female, male, all cultures, everyone who has ever lived or is now alive. Jung has 8 types. Dr.Phil has 3. If one buys into both writers, then one has to admit that there are 8x3=24 types. If one also buys into Redfield's 4 types, then it's 4x24=96 types. The list goes on (Bradshaw, Walsch, Shree-Rajneesh, etc.). I've counted 11,506 types so far.
@Darrell861 What Jung is talking about is archetypes, historical figures such as Jesus Christ being an example of 'The Redeemer' which basically in large lines describes the modern man/woman that wants try help others and free them from suffering. I actually read Jung today, and he referred to unbalanced - unhappy people and went on explaining the importance of a balance of emotion - intellect, if it's out of balance it causes a distortion of reality. Which seems to be the case with you.
@Homerus Jung had an ongoing sexual relationship with one of his clients, Sabina Sperlein. This is well-documented. Jung went through a period of psychosis from 1913 to 1916. Also well-documented. And you say my perception of reality is distorted? Huh?
@Homerus No one taught Jung how to interpret dreams. It is unethical for a licensed therapist to claim to have abilities that he does not posess. It's okay if your neighbor Marge invites you over for coffee so she can interpret your dreams. If you want to be so gullible as to believe her, fine. But dream interpretation has no place in a licensed profession. Prostitution is the oldest profession in the world. Dream interpretation is the oldest hoax in the world. It's absurd.
@Darrell861 I believe that it is not up to us to decide what is ethical and what is unethical. Even the idea of a licensed profession is man made. I get the feeling you are having a hard time reaching your emotions though, always stuck in your head trying to rationalize, I used to be like that aswell. But I think Jung was simply on a higher emotional-psychological state of awareness than most of us can grasp, that doesn't mean we should abandon his work.
@Homerus I'd like to know who you mean by "us." Anyone who consults a therapist can file a complaint with a licenscing board. If the therapist makes sexual advances on a client (as both Jung and Dr.Phil did), that is grounds for a complaint. If a client asks a therapist, "Do you have the ability to interpret my dreams?" and the therapist says, "Yes", that is grounds for a complaint. Neither Jung nor Dr. Phil have any respect for ethics. Oh, and one being "in their head" is a meaningless cliche.
@Darrell861 You basically really just respond to the parts you feel you have a case don't you. Anyway the fact that they have psychological insight doesn't make them immune to sexual feelings towards a cliënt, I would be worried about their humanity if this were never the case. Jung states that he was always questioning himself and his own methods, he never thought he was God and had all the answers, and I'm pretty sure the same goes for mr Phil. I've been in my head for 22 years, I can see now.
@Homerus It"s one thing if a therapist has sexual feelings toward a client. It's quite another when he openly acts on those feelings. To do so is unethical. It's one thing if a therapist believes he can interpret dreams. It's quite another when he openly acts on that belief. To do so is unethical. No one taught Jung how to interpret dreams. For that matter, no one can teach anyone how to interpret dreams. The only person who can interpret dreams is the person who experienced the dream himself.
@Darrell861 Jung had specific knowledge about dreams, symbols and their meaning, subjects he studied and did research for. Much more knowledge than the average person, therefor he can help the dreamer with the analysis of the dream, he doesn't claim he's got it right 100% of the time. But he has the knowledge and awareness to help other people balance their lives. Because that is what dreams - tales of the subconscious- are often usefull for according to Jung, compensation for imbalanced people.
@Homerus Jung claimed that by 1907 he had the infallible ability to interpret dreams, and that he was always correct., to the tune of 11 dreams a day, 7 days a week for 730 consecutive days (CW3,par557). If Jung had the specific knowledge to which you refer, he had acquired it prior to 1907. But in the years prior to 1907 he was spending almost 10 hours a day making observations of patiants at the Burgholzi Institute under Eugen Bleuler. He did not have the ability to interpret dreams.
@Darrell861 Did mr Jung either rob or raped you or any member of your family sir? Seems like you just have a personal grudge against the guy and are actually devoting quite some time and study pitifully trying to convince people he's a cheat. If you wanna do that, just write a book and see if anyone buys it.
@Darrell861 He never claimed infallibility in anything. To impute he ever did so is just a lie. The slightest amount of experience of our dreams displays our habit of projecting our own socially unacceptable instincts onto others, typically a bum, indian, black person or woman. The more chronically virtuous the consciousness, the more pestilent and heathenish the unconscious. Since you seem to have no such experience yourself, what is it you DO know? Teach us how to live w/o our shadow.
@serpentineflame "At that time [1907] I analyzed at least 4000 dreams a year." --CW3, par. 557 Expressed as a rate, that comes out to at minimum 8000 dreams over a two year period. In other words, 11 dreams a day, 7 days a week for 730 consecutive days. This quote is endorsed by Mary Ann Mattoon, PhD., who was a devout Jungian. Jung did in fact claim that he had the infallible ability to interpret dreams, and that he was always right. Now, what were you saying?
@Darrell861 You have no credibility loss to suffer when you just lie. I'm sure he analyzed 50 dreams on certain days, there's nothing fantastic about it. Mostly they just show people's aversion to the darkness of their human nature. The shadow has been around since Jacob and Esau, Gilgamesh and Enkidu, the Dioscuri and Xbolenque. You think before Newton there was no gravity, and so he must be an impostor for having fabricated it. What ridiculous artifice of ego do you believe you defend?
@serpentineflame Gravity exists independent of human existence. I went through grade school, high school and four years of college before I ever heard the term shadow. Jung has equated the shadow with original sin, which was invented by St. Paul and incorperated into Christian doctrine by St. Augustine. If one is not a Christian, there is no original sin. If one is not a Jungian there is no shadow. No one taught Jung how to interpret dreams. He made dreams mean what he wanted them to mean.
@serpentineflame Jung said man's real sin was when he disposed of his own inferiorities by inferiorizing another man. In most cultures the serpent is sacred, a symbol of autonomous vital life instincts, independent (godly) of man's will. This aspect of the shadow is the natural life of man, something integral to a proper life experience. His "shadow" terminology is arbitrary language for an actual experience. The schizoid is the prime example of an ego that has narrowed its scope of experience
@serpentineflame Jung didn't analyze one dream for ever person. You have to deal with more than one dream to notice the themes and trends in a particular individual's psychology. Why are you so impressed that he listened to people's dreams? In a single hour session he could have listened to 12 dreams and discussed the several that best exhibited the themes or were salient. Now he's not even working five days a week. Come on man, start making sense.
@serpentineflame As of 1907 no one had taught Jung how to interpret dreams. At that time he was making observations of patients at a mental institution. He was also working on word assoctiation tests. His claim in CW3 par.557 is a lie. He was testing the gullibility of his followers. Anthony Storr calls it confidence trickery. Jung was not interpreting 12 dreams per hour at the time. He did not even listen to 12 dreams per hour. Ever.
@Darrell861 To Jung man's real sin was disposing of his own inferiorities by inferiorizing others. Waking up and acknowledging the independence of some impulses and instincts, and coming back down to adam's plane of existence was part of Jung's intent. The term shadow is arbitrary for an actual living experience. Anyone with any intellectual integrity can soon verify the absolute reality of the event. The psychological caveat is that only you can observe in yourself what is at work in all us
@serpentineflame Dierdre Bair has written a 600 page bigraphy of Jung. She rakes him over the coals. Were he alive today, Jung would not respond to the criticism. He would say Bair has a personal problem. She has inferiorities that she does not want to face, The same game was played by John Bradshaw. Criticism is rooted in the emotional history of the critic. This is a simple way a guru disposes of his critics. Jungians can always play the shadow card. It's always up their sleeve.
@Darrell861 No, it's because you and your crackpot critics are too morally complacent to undertake any legitimate suffering or maturely respond to any internal conflict. You drone on and on about something you don't have any immediate experience of whatsoever. You have no conscious knowledge of the dualistic fragmentation of your own psychic life, so don't pretend to have any comprehension of Jung's basic terminology All I hear you say is you haven't the capacity to even test Jung's hypothesis
@Darrell861 By observing the spontaneous manifestations of your fantasies and comparing them and corroborating them with the observations Jung made early on of the tension between his spirit and his inferiorites, the same manifestations produced in anyone in the wide world who has consciously retained them and thus can share them or ponder them alone. I'm not familiar with Bair, but if she denies the existence of unconscious inferiorities, then she is not speaking form experience.
@serpentineflame What is Jung's hypothesis? And how does one go about testing this hypothesis? Bair is a biogropher. She is not a psycologist, nor someome who writes about hypotheses. She simply digs into Jung's past, and rakes him over the coals.
@serpentineflame Whether or not Bair acknowledges or denies "unconscious inferiorities," whatever they are, has nothing to do with anything. One should rather address her criticism of Jung, rather than changing the subject away from Jung and focussing criticism on her. Her criticism of Jung is well documented.
@Darrell861 I don't care if she criticizes Jung the man. Many people can't tolerate someone who lives outside the ready-made convictions of their culture. You may go on and on condemning Jung's dubious method of guiding a few women through their crucibles. The more christian or excessively virtuous one's consciousness, the more heathenish his unconscious behaves. Anyone in our culture really trying to live up to its demands, must bear a malignant violation of his nature in his unconscious.
@serpentineflame "Indeed, the structure of the psyche is so contrapuntal that one can scarcely make any psychological assertion or general statement without having immediately to state its opposite." --Jung, CW16, par.177 Jung is presenting a thermodynamic view of the human psyche, thereby creating the illusion that what he is saying is scientific when in fact it is not. Clever way to avoid criticism. One's criticism of Jung is in direct proportion to their uncomscious inferiorities.
@serpentineflame In other words, if I criticize Jung, or if Bair criticizes Jung, or if McKlynn criticizes Jung, the problem lies with us. We are compensating for our own unconscious inferiorities. There's nothing wrong with Jung and his lies and his ethical violations.
@serpentineflame Oh, and one more thing. No one has the ability to interpret other people's dreams. Not Jung or anyone. Dream interpretation is the oldest hoax in the world. Jung got away with that scam for decades. But I'm not going to change your mind and you are not going to change mine.
@Darrell861 We have already discussed that and I have already rejected that statement of yours before. Thanks for the chess offer. Live long and prosper.
@serpentineflame It is logistically impossible to meet 11 new people a day 7 days a week for 730 consecutive days, much less interpret their dreams. Jung lied in 1957. He was testing the gullibility of his followers. The term is "confidence trickery." Jung didn't have the ability to interpret even one dream of another person. No one does. If one wants to interpret one's own dreams, fine. But to interpret the dreams of clients in a licensed profession is unethical.
@serpentineflame Oh, and another thing. Jung invented the shadow. If one is not a Jungian, then there is no shadow. I do know how to read, and I can teach someone how to make spaghetti and meatballs. Jung has a lot of people fooled, including you.
"We are so full of aprehensions (and) fears that one doesn't know exactly to what it points. One thing is sure .. a great change of our psychological attitude is imanent."
"..because the only real danger that exists is man himself. He is the great danger, and we are pitifully unaware of it."
@CornsilkSW Jung was a master at coming up with cliches that have no practical application. He has said, " Show me a sane man and I will cure him." He was not kidding. He regarded everyone in the world as having some sort of problem. He created problems where there were none, thereby setting himself up as the solution. His invention of the shadow was a scare tactic. Gurus like Jung and Jim Jones used scare tactics to intice and intimidate their followers, who beecome dependent upon the guru.
This last part, when he told what he could predict about other great war (trought dreams) and he said wasn't clear enough... was that a possible prediction of the confuse conflict in cold war and the Cuba missiles (where US an URSS almost began another world war), where in the end nothing happens?
He responded to the question by saying that because people in the modern era live with such fear and apprehension (likely implying socially and politically) that visions or dreams of war are not directly indicative of a coming war, as they may have once been. War as an internal symbol can be deeply personal. IMO, I don't think the answer could be unquestionably linked to the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Many inmates are in prison because that is the manifestation of the psychic and mental cage and chains they were in already. The imprisoned soul leads to an incarcerated body.
I find the physche a fascinating subject . An example of my fascination is this !
Today I tethered my dog to a free standing swing board outside a post office,at that exact moment i was over whelmed with an image of my dog running after a cat whilst still attached .I entered the post office & within seconds my dog was running barking down the street dragging the sign.Did I predict the future event ?Did I manifest it ?or was it just the one of many consequential outcomes that was possible?
Whereas Jung feared the "nullification of man" this nihilist project is actually realized by Skinner who says "I am sometimes asked "Do you think of yourself as you think of organisms you study?" The answer is yes. So far as I know, my behavior at any given moment has been nothing more than the product of my genetic endowment, my personal history, and the current setting...If I am right about human behavior, I have written the autobiography of a nonperson" (Khon PUNISHED BY REWARDS 7).
Tell that to the behavior analysts & for that matter the many psychiatrists who now give their patients behavioral homework & other such tasks based on behavioral research.
Someone who cares about practical design ends up with real data proves something. Kind of like an engineer.
ABA and behavior modification is a science.
Neither you nor I can prove a soul or difference from man relative to another organism.
Than you. We are done here with you and Skinner and his so-called psychology of pigeons and rats. This is after all a Jung playlist. I suggest you go to Skinner's clips to continue discussing him, as you have certainly done.
An engineer is not a scientist any more than a computer technician, and neither is Skinner a true scientist but a technician for "crowd control" and brainwashing.
Good riddance Skinner, may he rest in peace with your Biblical dogs.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
There's hard evidence proving Bible is accurate like video "Revealing God's Treasure - Red Sea Crossing" here on You Tube, but knowledge of this data is required to know, by this data, God exists.
The only thing known at all times in life is yourself. This data on yourself can only drive you to the correct religion if your thinking of this knowledge is accurate & that being Psalms 51:17 as any works based religion takes initial data & disregards it.
Skinner studied man accurately & concludes correctly on morals & freedom. Wrong only on philosophy. Man is not a "caged ape," but rather able to condition more fully by thought then by action in environment. Thought is controlled by external stimulus, but thought conditions more. Free will is merely a sharpened discriminative control.
Ray, B. (1969) Selective attention: the effects of combining stimuli which control incompatible behavior. J. of the Exp. Analysis of Beh., 12, 539-550.
Jung did not "prove" a single thing, but everything he said is true; Skinner proved everything, but everything he proved is not true. "This is especially true since science is not really after truth, not even after correctness, but only after reliability and predictability (which is something very different)" (as Wolfgang Giegerich in THE SOUL'S LOGICAL LIFE 218), a Jungian psychologist, said.
I suppose ABAisSCIENCE has been "conditioned" to believe in Skinner dogmas by a superstitious belief in the "scientific method", or better THE RELIGION OF TECHNOLOGY as David Noble has called it in a book where he shows how these two lunacies blend into a single madness without contradiction: Xn dominionist fundamentalism and the worship of science and technology. But behaviorist ψ only shows how to control people like cattle, something it never quite accomplishes for there is always remainder.
Those who accuse Jung of not being "scientific" obviously have the most narrow conception of science governed by quantitative criteria, as if the 'human sciences' (Geisteswissenschaften) can be subsummed under brain chemistry or some non-sense like that. Take poetry and now imagine a Skinnerean lunkhead try to explain it by means of "conditioning" or "reinforcement" in a "scientific" way. Quantum Physics should have taught these brain-scientist the epistemological humility of the Uncertainty Pri
Skinner's right about morals & freedom. Wrong only on philosophy. Man is not a "caged ape," but rather able to condition more fully by thought then by action in environment. Still thought is controlled by external stimulus, but thought conditions more. Hence your free will is merely a sharpened discriminative control.
Ray, B. (1969) Selective attention: the effects of combining stimuli which control incompatible behavior. J. of the Exp. Analysis of Beh., 12, 539-550.
I suppose ABAisSCIENCE have been "conditioned" to believe in Skinner by a superstitious belief in the "scientific method", what is called scientism, or better THE RELIGION OF TECHNOLOGY as David Noble has called it in a book where he shows how his two lunacies blend into one without contradiction: Xn dominionist fundamentalism and the worship of science and technology. For that is why he keeps arguing as thus: Skinner is everything because his ψ shows how to control people like cattle
Can I add this series is enlightening and interesting?
Still the man proved nothing scientifically and I don't see anyone arguing with me on this or offering something mainly because Jung has proven nothing scientifically.
As much as any words can be cool or inspire watch the videos, but if you want to learn about man which Jung implies is important might I suggest to you Dr. B. F. Skinner?
You really are an interesting psycho case, a perfect dissociation between an atheist scientistic ψ and a primitive belief in the Religion of the Middle Ages--much like saying: I am an atheist and a Xn fundamentalist. Your utopian belief in science really belongs in the 19th century, the heyday of scientific materialism. I'm sure you know all about the epistemological problems of QED, in view of which the very EXISTENCE of matter cannot be "proven" scientifically?
"Only as a psychology "with truth" can psychology gain the status of a theoretical discipline. And only as a theoretical one can it be in the wild. Without it, it is inevitably a mere technique, something you do (action!) to achieve practical results, despite all disclaimers." (Giegerich THE SOUL'S LOGICAL LIFE 218). In other words, when the question of Truth is reserved for Religion then ψ becomes mere behaviorism, the "science" of the last man.
I think Khon nailed it on the head when he said "The one real insight about Skinner that came to me after talking with him for a while was that he was less a theorist than a technician. The man was fascinated-indeed almost obsessed-with practical problems of design" (PUNISHED BY REWARDS 280). Because he was a technocrat Skinner's half-baked theory gives itself airs of scientificity, much as a "computer scientist" does, although they're both no more than technicians.
ABA, you are massively contradicting yourself at every turn. Quoting the bible all the time proves how you have been conditioned and nothing more. Stimulus Response is proven and exploited to condition society, indeed, but whether what is being conditioned is moral is the real question. Can you deny this?
Do you believe that those who have the ability to condition the masses are moral or with so much power, inevitably corrupt with power?
If skinner and behaviorism work so well. Why do we still have things like the terrible 2s? Things like these should have been eliminated. Behaviorism has been wrong and insufficient as much as it has been right useful.
For any one who still swallows Skinnerean mythology, I recommend PUNISHED BY REWARDS by Khon, who shows how behaviorism undermines the moral and philosophical existence of real human beings.
Normally, One would hesitate before making qualitative statements about the Unconscious when one has had no considerable experience with which to observe it and therefore has absolutely no evidence with which to refute its objectivity. THAT would be Pathetically unscientific not to mention Pompously Misanthropic.
I'm all for the truth being brought out for all to hear so don't keep your candle in the dark or under something bring it out to bless people mmariebored.
Trudl Junge, Hitler's former personal secretary, noted the Führer's success came with his ability to manipulate other people's conscience. On a vast scale, German people no longer knew right from wrong. Koonz presents a compelling argument to suggest that Junge was in some degree right. The Germans did not surrender their conscience but submitted to transformation away from conventional Western notions of right & wrong to a radical, racial nationalism's actions & outcomes. - J. Kleiman
Sabina Spielrein corresponded & influenced Jung & Freud in their development of psychoanalytic theory (Carotenuto, 1980). Piaget was personally analyzed by Sabina Spielrein in the 1920s. Sabina Spielrein had a relationship with Jung & Piaget (with Jung while his patient). She was 2nd woman to be admitted to Wednesday Psychological Society, in November 1911 (Freud, 1910-1911/1979; Spielrein, 1912). Through Russian Psychoanalytic Society gave several lectures attended by Vygotsky in 1923.
He speaks true here, "We need more understanding of human nature because the only real danger that exists is man himself."
He speaks true that he knows nothing on it.
B. F. Skinner did create a scientific way to understand man that has merit, but the philosophy of B. F. Skinner is inaccurate.
The fact is that Zechariah 12:10 can't be explained by Applied Behavior Analysis or conditioning and can't be explained by evolution or the survival of the fittest type logic either.
"Can't be explained"? Any Joe Shmoe can see a disaster coming(disasters happen in cycles for every nation) and write in a book that God did it because of this or that evil...
You have a lot of nerve pointing out his honest and HUMBLE admission to his own falibility when you can't even think outside of the Bible's guidelines. When he said man was his own danger, he was talking about people like you, who want to shut up learning into one outdated book.
Jung's work inaccurate; B. F. Skinner did create a science to understand man. Man is conditioned to perform. Do you think after WWII conditioning disappeared? No. Do you think that holocausts in Africa have used technology? No. What will the future bring? Man is wicked & so with technology in future I would think "no flesh" will be the call of the day. If you wish to say that doesn't prove the Bible so be it, "but do not doubt that you are a killer, Louie." (Interview with the Vampire)
Humans are survival creatures, yes, and I don't deny "conditioning". I know that the holocaust in Africa was programmed into those men, there are documents on their radio broadcasts telling the soldiers how to kill the people in a way that would make them suffer the most, they were instructed. And just google "History of PSYOP". Man has always been manipulated, man is not the "evil" the manipulators claim them to be. They do that to justify controlling them, for their own personal gain.
Well, believe me you have to do some conditioning prior to describing how to kill to get killing behavior, but are you trying to say that man is so programmed there is no accountability at all?
Perhaps B. F. Skinner would say man is a "caged ape" but I belief there is sharpened discriminative control or mindfulness and thus man is accountable or man therefore is the "evil." In your account is not man the programmer as much as the responder?
In YOUR account, you're saying that ALL men are "evil". I'm saying that there are men currupted by greed behind the scenes conditionaing the minds of who they consider "caged apes", less than the human they see themselves as. It's about greed. It's about population control, Babel was a good example of this, and, why do you suppose it was so important for King David not to "number the people"? You're not ready to see the truth.
With Verichip the Jew can be eliminated in less than a week till there are only 144,000 left breathing on the Earth.
All men are evil. The controllers as you seem to see them are also conditioned by the environment. They are also human & though they may be more evil it is merely a human condition of us all. Of humans it can be said there is nothing good in them save unless they start to sharpen their discriminative control towards what some might call morals.
So you're one of those people who teaches the Verichip is the "mark of the beast" when in reality it's the same as a S.S. number and if you don't have one because you were afraid to get one due to the population-controlling LIE that it's evil and going to kill you, then you WON'T be able to function on the planet and yes you WILL be "eliminated" because you'll end up starving to death due to your own stubornness.
Smart logic. If you think I need to number myself like a Jew in holocaust otherwise let me die I suggest you deep freeze me now because when people care so little about life things get scarce. Did you ever think about how many meals you can get out of a holocaust survivor? Deep freeze me now & more meals can be prepared. I'm writing merely to warn that "ultimate power corrupts" & I doubt a universal control will make Germany love Jews or avoid wars. Why allow others control of your country?
please don't go here ABAisSCIENCE, you've no clue about the ecology of genocide, you speak with little to no authority on this subject. PLEASE leave topics like this to the experts.
thank you.
I'd really prefer to have an intelligent conversion @ Jung, not your needling every vid. What have you to proove? Do you think all psychs are ignorant of Skinner? That Skinner is EVERYTHING? I met him in 1989-how old were you then, what was your world?
If "all men are evil", you need to read some Philip Zimbardo. I promise, you will not be disappointed; I suspect if you research his career, you might find him to be of equal (if not better because he's still living [know your history of science]) scientific rigor. His experiments opened to the door to automaticity, which I believe Skinner would find valid today.
In the end, psychology is nothing if it can't account for everything; theoretical diversity is quite helpful.
"With Verichip the Jew can be eliminated in less than a week till there are only 144,000 left breathing on the Earth."
if this means what i think it does, it appears you've resisted the shadow to the point it's overcome your moral compass. have you insight into the complexes that plague you? if not, i'd strongly recommend you seek insight (not merely succorance nor hyperinflection).
eliminating Jews? Are you serious? I've read much Skinner but never anything about genocide. You serious?
Chickenjojo, Skinner doesn't write of Jewish holocausts period, but they happen on Earth and Skinner would describe it relative to conditioning no doubt.
Why allow technology to bring down walls?
Are we to assume that war will be irrelevant without walls? Are we to be stronger in a specific country for bringing them down?
Are we at peace or moving towards it by conditioning in this last century such that trust is good?
Should the Jew trust men? Does behavior show conditioning for trust?
secondly, I can't decipher what it is you are trying to say; your axe-grinding against Jung isn't consistent with the content of this most recent post. please get your cards straight.
thirdly, brief yourself on recent neurological research on cooperation, jealousy, selflessness, and "I".
fourth, PLEASE read some Zimbardo. I promise, he will not disappoint.
Jung is allowed to be right philosophically or morally or about an aspect of thinking relative to meaning, but that has nothing to do with scientificially describing, controlling, or understanding man externally or internally.
What a beautiful mind and I can assure you he had to face some things we ,or I, would consider anything but beautuful to become the man we see here. Thanks for the video
tonymalone501 1 month ago
This man was a genius before his time, also nobel prize winner! Carl Jung's work helps a lot to explain and shatter the ignorance of the sheeps and explain a lot of "hocus pocus" superstition.
Too many people now don't even bother to actually read his studies and expect to be spoon fed the information. I especially enjoyed his theory on "Synchronicity" in relation to "random sampling".
2 people were too lazy to read his works and expected to be spoon fed like a baby.
Wolfsbane909 4 months ago 2
@Wolfsbane909 me too. It is so nice to see that I am not alone in what I call knowing and being true to ourself.(myself) Static is where most of us believe because of fear. I love your comment
tonymalone501 1 month ago
What a beautiful man
QuantumProphet 4 months ago
After watching the "Face to Face" interview, I am only just beginning to understand the extent of Jung, and I am starting to realise that he was far more than his contributions to psychotherapy and psychology.
I think if Jung had been from Asia or the Indian sub-continent, he would have been considered 'divine' - a spark of Braman.
He is certainly one of Europe's more blessed gurus and his comments on the nature of man are almost poetic, but plainly chilling at the same time.
earlydoorsjones 4 months ago
@earlydoorsjones It is a very beautiful person. I think he upps Freud by more than one :)
QuantumProphet 4 months ago
@QuantumProphet
I do not wish to take anything away from Freud but I feel that his "followers" made more positive contributions to psychoanalysis than he did.
Or, to put it another way... Freud seemed very fixed, whereas Jung, Adler (etc) were more willing to explore the possibilities.
earlydoorsjones 4 months ago
@earlydoorsjones Yes possibilities are endless. thanks
tonymalone501 1 month ago
@QuantumProphet A quantum leap maybe. It is not a contest I don't believe. I know this is not what you were saying but it is an observation that I agree with.
tonymalone501 1 month ago
What would I not have given to know this man..... This Soul
MrCuntyballs2U 6 months ago 2
jung is up there as one of my faves!
07Aristotle 6 months ago 6
I didn't understand what exactly did he mean when calling "having visions of the future" as facts, and how exactly is psyche not bound to the confinements of reality. can anyone explain?
smartmarlino 6 months ago
@smartmarlino Synchronicity bro! :)
I think what he is saying falls in line with quantum physics quite well.
zentonil 5 months ago
"One thing is sure, a great change of our psychological attitude is imminent, that is certain, because we need more psychoogy, we need more understanding of human nature, because the only real danger that exists is man himself, he is the danger, we are pitifully unaware of it! We know nothing of man! Far too little!"
ericacaa 7 months ago
superb
bluetoebeing 7 months ago
His biography memories,dreams,reflections is one of the most enchanting books I've ever read. Wonderful, ethereal and mysterious.
adamscott 8 months ago
genuine wisdom
cp1492 8 months ago
loved it.
YinPisces 9 months ago
He was so right on... man is the only great danger.. I often think of his quote: "The mind of man can create an Armageddon.." Thank you for posting this..
bizakis9 10 months ago
i finished this with a smile on my face: )
moedemama 10 months ago
After readingand listening, i must say this, Jung, nor any of his predecessor cant be define as right or wrong. Him, just like Copernic and others, opened a door to new possibilities, new way of see things. By doing so, they have contributed in many ways in the advancemet of our society, some were good, some were wrong.
Also, sounds creates frequency, colors does, oil has a frequency, so has the moon...so why not our thoughts???
kyoku1975 1 year ago
@kyoku1975 - The brain actually does...
Delta Range - 0.5 to 4 HZ (associated with deep sleep)
Theta Range - 4 HZ to 8 HZ (seen in dreaming sleep, and other mental states where the mind is wandering, like daydreaming and imagining)
Alpha Range - 8 to 13 HZ (relaxed but awake)
Beta Range - 13 HZ to 30 (??) HZ (normal awake state/aware)
Gamma Range - 30 (??) HZ to 60 (??) HZ (associated with consciousness - the brain stops producing gamma waves when we're put under for anaesthesia, for example)
facepalmization 11 months ago
I have no idea why is Jung so underrated. Freud totaly overshadowed him.
juresaiyan 1 year ago
@juresaiyan Both say not only that all dreams have meaning, but invariably have more than one meaning. By not defining an upper limit, "more than one" means infinite. That claim does not make sense, and has no foundation. Both played into contempmorary dream interpretation chic, thereby setting themselves up as dream gurus.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 I beg your pardon, but who are you to object Jung?
juresaiyan 1 year ago
@juresaiyan This is an open forum. Anyone can criticize Jung. First Amendment. Freedom of Speech.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861
Criticize without fundament turn the Freedom of Speech a Freedom of Ignorance and Silliness...Its a insult to the concept Freedom of Speech.
Geko2006 1 year ago
@Geko2006 You deal in extreme dont you LoL No one has been offended, everyone come up with opinions and share them. Its called having a "debate of ideas". Since anyone i read in this forum claimed to own the absolute truth, Darell, just like yourself, our entitled to share ideas from their own personal experience. Like einstein said "Its all relative" aint it? What i saw and felt in my life build my system of beliefs, like all of us.
That said, what do YOU think ?
kyoku1975 1 year ago
"As the world becomes more technically efficient, it seems increasingly necessary for people to behave communally and collectively. Now do you think it's possible that the highest development of man may be to submerge his own individuality in a kind of collective conscienceless." around 8:00 listen to the answer because the question describes pretty much what the internet is. Pretty scary huh?
Gaharian 1 year ago
Carl Jung concludes that collective history of mankind reflects itself in dreams.So we see fearful dreams due to historical events of second half of last century.But he has missed a positive side of human nature.Those are human being who are struggling to stop future world war.Perhaps this character of humanity was unknown to Jung.
directorazeem 1 year ago
@directorazeem Of course he also sees the positive side. In fact his whole lifetime was dedicated to analyse the psyche of men, to understand the state of mind that couses problems like war. He clearly quotes that the real problem of agression, war, etc. lies in side the spyche of men and that's why the psyche should be studied intensly to prevent further wars from emerging. That's a pretty positive struggle to stop world war, if you ask me !
etiennealive 1 year ago
@etiennealive It's one thing if Jung claims to be an expert on what causes war, man's inhumanity towards man, and the existence of evil . That is the macrocosm: the big picture. It's quite another when he practices psychiatry, i.e. one on one counseling with a client. That is the microcosm. It's not a good mix. The result is that Jung looks for and creates a problem in the client where there is none. Aslo, the client is intimidated from the outset. A good psychotherapist stays neutral.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Well, of course he's a psychotherapist. And unfortunatly, war sometimes is created in some of us who aren't clients. Just turn on the eight o clock news. I didn't say I aprove all of his method's.
I think macrocosmos war is created by each individual microcosmos war, wich emerges in each personal psyche. It's just so that people with the same thoughts often form a group.
etiennealive 1 year ago
@directorazeem Here's the collective unconscious internet: On p.59-60 (ff) of Man and His Symbols Jung presents a case study of the dream diary of an 8-year-old girl. She had never opened a Bible, yet had a dream which depicted a passage from the Bible. This means that a Lithuanian potato farmer in 1450 could have the same dream. A 12-year-old in Indonesia could have the same dream. Anyone not familiar with Moby Dick could have a dream about a captain in search of a whale. Jung's nonesense.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@directorazeem It is not the psychiatrist's job to stop future war. Psychotherapy is not a crusade. It is the psychiatrist's job to take each case on its own terms. Jung regarded all dreams as an indication of a problem. He never gave a case study of a dream which was simply a dream. Even a happy dream. By being so pre-occupied with war and man's inhumanity toward man, he used psychiatry to use scare tactics and create problems where there were none. This is a typical guru technique.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@directorazeem Last night i dreamt I was in Florida, making my way down two sandy peninnsulas, trying to get back where I started, come upon a small tent which is a helicopter stand, I pick up a small but flyable dark off-green helicopter, I carry it down the beach, come upon small eatery. I enter, the owner's daughter is seated in an otherwise empty place. Now. I fail to see what my dream has to do with the collective history of mankind, still less than war. Comment?
Darrell861 1 year ago
Carl Jung concludes that collective history of mankind reflects itself in dreams.So we see fearful dreams due to historical events of second half of last century.
directorazeem 1 year ago
Comment removed
Darrell861 1 year ago
Comment removed
serpentineflame 1 year ago
" The only real danger is MAN itself.."
So true. People use cliches like Guns kill people, Money is the root of all evil. Bullshit. Guns/money don't think or act- people do. People are the ones manipulating these things.
Thanks for the upload.
cellardoor199991 1 year ago
Thanks for posting this gem of an interview which makes the apparent fact the more apparent that today's world sorely needs such serious, profound men, and women, as C.G. Jung to help us survive, which we can only do by progressing with our conciousness on the path of self-realization, rather than falling into the abyss of social, cultural, psychological and environmental destruction. Why then doesn't the world listen enough? Perhaps the answer is: not enough yet.
winehousedrunk 1 year ago
Comment removed
winehousedrunk 1 year ago
Jung was a genius without any doubt, I'm gonna be sure to study his writings.
"The only great danger is man itself, and we are pitifully aware of it"
Homerus 1 year ago
@Homerus I agree. Jung was a genius. So is Dr. Phil. Both are experts at fooling people. Both are pathological liars. Both make blanket staements about the human condition. Both come up with their own pet theories of psychological types. Both of them have no regard for ethics in the licensed practice of psychotherapy. Around 1907 Jung started claiming he had the ability to interpret dreams, and incorperated that claim into his private practice. That is absurd and unethical.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 You sound like you are conditioned to a very dogmatic way of thinking, in which Jung's theory & Dr. Phil's theory (which stam from ancient principles, and are not in any way their own, simply interpretations or simplifications for the public) have no place.
Who are you to say that Jungs claim is absurd and unethical, what is your evidence for these claims, or are you just throwing around insults without any consideration of their meaning?
I'm curious though, what's truth for u
Homerus 1 year ago
@Homerus Introversion and extraversion do not stem from ancient principles. They were invented by Jung in 1921, CW6. Jung based the distinction on his subjective analysis of the literary styles of two writers, Tertullian and Origen, who lived over 1500 years before Jung was born. Dr. Phil''s internalizer, externalizer and chance people are loosely based on Jung's inventions, and do not stem from ancient principles. Several other pop psychologists have invented their own psychological types.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Introversion and extraversion are merely words to describe ones character, the characteristics were always there, Jung did not invent introversion and extraversion, maybe he thought up those words, and analyzed the behaviour, but that's all he did. As far as I can see and read, both Jung & Dr. Phil are dedicated to helping others, by making unhappy or unbalanced people aware of the true nature of reality. I see the beauty in that.
Homerus 1 year ago
@Homerus Jung and Dr. Phil are not referring to unbalanced and unhappy people. They are making blanket statements about all people: female, male, all cultures, everyone who has ever lived or is now alive. Jung has 8 types. Dr.Phil has 3. If one buys into both writers, then one has to admit that there are 8x3=24 types. If one also buys into Redfield's 4 types, then it's 4x24=96 types. The list goes on (Bradshaw, Walsch, Shree-Rajneesh, etc.). I've counted 11,506 types so far.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 What Jung is talking about is archetypes, historical figures such as Jesus Christ being an example of 'The Redeemer' which basically in large lines describes the modern man/woman that wants try help others and free them from suffering. I actually read Jung today, and he referred to unbalanced - unhappy people and went on explaining the importance of a balance of emotion - intellect, if it's out of balance it causes a distortion of reality. Which seems to be the case with you.
Homerus 1 year ago
@Homerus Jung had an ongoing sexual relationship with one of his clients, Sabina Sperlein. This is well-documented. Jung went through a period of psychosis from 1913 to 1916. Also well-documented. And you say my perception of reality is distorted? Huh?
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Homerus No one taught Jung how to interpret dreams. It is unethical for a licensed therapist to claim to have abilities that he does not posess. It's okay if your neighbor Marge invites you over for coffee so she can interpret your dreams. If you want to be so gullible as to believe her, fine. But dream interpretation has no place in a licensed profession. Prostitution is the oldest profession in the world. Dream interpretation is the oldest hoax in the world. It's absurd.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 I believe that it is not up to us to decide what is ethical and what is unethical. Even the idea of a licensed profession is man made. I get the feeling you are having a hard time reaching your emotions though, always stuck in your head trying to rationalize, I used to be like that aswell. But I think Jung was simply on a higher emotional-psychological state of awareness than most of us can grasp, that doesn't mean we should abandon his work.
Homerus 1 year ago
@Homerus I'd like to know who you mean by "us." Anyone who consults a therapist can file a complaint with a licenscing board. If the therapist makes sexual advances on a client (as both Jung and Dr.Phil did), that is grounds for a complaint. If a client asks a therapist, "Do you have the ability to interpret my dreams?" and the therapist says, "Yes", that is grounds for a complaint. Neither Jung nor Dr. Phil have any respect for ethics. Oh, and one being "in their head" is a meaningless cliche.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 You basically really just respond to the parts you feel you have a case don't you. Anyway the fact that they have psychological insight doesn't make them immune to sexual feelings towards a cliënt, I would be worried about their humanity if this were never the case. Jung states that he was always questioning himself and his own methods, he never thought he was God and had all the answers, and I'm pretty sure the same goes for mr Phil. I've been in my head for 22 years, I can see now.
Homerus 1 year ago
@Homerus It"s one thing if a therapist has sexual feelings toward a client. It's quite another when he openly acts on those feelings. To do so is unethical. It's one thing if a therapist believes he can interpret dreams. It's quite another when he openly acts on that belief. To do so is unethical. No one taught Jung how to interpret dreams. For that matter, no one can teach anyone how to interpret dreams. The only person who can interpret dreams is the person who experienced the dream himself.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Jung had specific knowledge about dreams, symbols and their meaning, subjects he studied and did research for. Much more knowledge than the average person, therefor he can help the dreamer with the analysis of the dream, he doesn't claim he's got it right 100% of the time. But he has the knowledge and awareness to help other people balance their lives. Because that is what dreams - tales of the subconscious- are often usefull for according to Jung, compensation for imbalanced people.
Homerus 1 year ago
@Homerus Jung claimed that by 1907 he had the infallible ability to interpret dreams, and that he was always correct., to the tune of 11 dreams a day, 7 days a week for 730 consecutive days (CW3,par557). If Jung had the specific knowledge to which you refer, he had acquired it prior to 1907. But in the years prior to 1907 he was spending almost 10 hours a day making observations of patiants at the Burgholzi Institute under Eugen Bleuler. He did not have the ability to interpret dreams.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Did mr Jung either rob or raped you or any member of your family sir? Seems like you just have a personal grudge against the guy and are actually devoting quite some time and study pitifully trying to convince people he's a cheat. If you wanna do that, just write a book and see if anyone buys it.
Homerus 1 year ago
@Darrell861 He never claimed infallibility in anything. To impute he ever did so is just a lie. The slightest amount of experience of our dreams displays our habit of projecting our own socially unacceptable instincts onto others, typically a bum, indian, black person or woman. The more chronically virtuous the consciousness, the more pestilent and heathenish the unconscious. Since you seem to have no such experience yourself, what is it you DO know? Teach us how to live w/o our shadow.
serpentineflame 1 year ago
@serpentineflame "At that time [1907] I analyzed at least 4000 dreams a year." --CW3, par. 557 Expressed as a rate, that comes out to at minimum 8000 dreams over a two year period. In other words, 11 dreams a day, 7 days a week for 730 consecutive days. This quote is endorsed by Mary Ann Mattoon, PhD., who was a devout Jungian. Jung did in fact claim that he had the infallible ability to interpret dreams, and that he was always right. Now, what were you saying?
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 You have no credibility loss to suffer when you just lie. I'm sure he analyzed 50 dreams on certain days, there's nothing fantastic about it. Mostly they just show people's aversion to the darkness of their human nature. The shadow has been around since Jacob and Esau, Gilgamesh and Enkidu, the Dioscuri and Xbolenque. You think before Newton there was no gravity, and so he must be an impostor for having fabricated it. What ridiculous artifice of ego do you believe you defend?
serpentineflame 1 year ago
@serpentineflame Gravity exists independent of human existence. I went through grade school, high school and four years of college before I ever heard the term shadow. Jung has equated the shadow with original sin, which was invented by St. Paul and incorperated into Christian doctrine by St. Augustine. If one is not a Christian, there is no original sin. If one is not a Jungian there is no shadow. No one taught Jung how to interpret dreams. He made dreams mean what he wanted them to mean.
Darrell861 1 year ago
Comment removed
serpentineflame 1 year ago
Comment removed
serpentineflame 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@serpentineflame Jung said man's real sin was when he disposed of his own inferiorities by inferiorizing another man. In most cultures the serpent is sacred, a symbol of autonomous vital life instincts, independent (godly) of man's will. This aspect of the shadow is the natural life of man, something integral to a proper life experience. His "shadow" terminology is arbitrary language for an actual experience. The schizoid is the prime example of an ego that has narrowed its scope of experience
serpentineflame 1 year ago
@serpentineflame Jung didn't analyze one dream for ever person. You have to deal with more than one dream to notice the themes and trends in a particular individual's psychology. Why are you so impressed that he listened to people's dreams? In a single hour session he could have listened to 12 dreams and discussed the several that best exhibited the themes or were salient. Now he's not even working five days a week. Come on man, start making sense.
serpentineflame 1 year ago
@serpentineflame As of 1907 no one had taught Jung how to interpret dreams. At that time he was making observations of patients at a mental institution. He was also working on word assoctiation tests. His claim in CW3 par.557 is a lie. He was testing the gullibility of his followers. Anthony Storr calls it confidence trickery. Jung was not interpreting 12 dreams per hour at the time. He did not even listen to 12 dreams per hour. Ever.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 To Jung man's real sin was disposing of his own inferiorities by inferiorizing others. Waking up and acknowledging the independence of some impulses and instincts, and coming back down to adam's plane of existence was part of Jung's intent. The term shadow is arbitrary for an actual living experience. Anyone with any intellectual integrity can soon verify the absolute reality of the event. The psychological caveat is that only you can observe in yourself what is at work in all us
serpentineflame 1 year ago
@serpentineflame Dierdre Bair has written a 600 page bigraphy of Jung. She rakes him over the coals. Were he alive today, Jung would not respond to the criticism. He would say Bair has a personal problem. She has inferiorities that she does not want to face, The same game was played by John Bradshaw. Criticism is rooted in the emotional history of the critic. This is a simple way a guru disposes of his critics. Jungians can always play the shadow card. It's always up their sleeve.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 No, it's because you and your crackpot critics are too morally complacent to undertake any legitimate suffering or maturely respond to any internal conflict. You drone on and on about something you don't have any immediate experience of whatsoever. You have no conscious knowledge of the dualistic fragmentation of your own psychic life, so don't pretend to have any comprehension of Jung's basic terminology All I hear you say is you haven't the capacity to even test Jung's hypothesis
serpentineflame 1 year ago
@serpentineflame Diedre Bair's biography was acclaimed by the New York Times book review. And you are saying she is a crackpot.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@serpentineflame How does one go about testing Jung's hypothesis? And what is Jung's hypothesis?
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 By observing the spontaneous manifestations of your fantasies and comparing them and corroborating them with the observations Jung made early on of the tension between his spirit and his inferiorites, the same manifestations produced in anyone in the wide world who has consciously retained them and thus can share them or ponder them alone. I'm not familiar with Bair, but if she denies the existence of unconscious inferiorities, then she is not speaking form experience.
serpentineflame 1 year ago
@serpentineflame What is Jung's hypothesis? And how does one go about testing this hypothesis? Bair is a biogropher. She is not a psycologist, nor someome who writes about hypotheses. She simply digs into Jung's past, and rakes him over the coals.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@serpentineflame Whether or not Bair acknowledges or denies "unconscious inferiorities," whatever they are, has nothing to do with anything. One should rather address her criticism of Jung, rather than changing the subject away from Jung and focussing criticism on her. Her criticism of Jung is well documented.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 I don't care if she criticizes Jung the man. Many people can't tolerate someone who lives outside the ready-made convictions of their culture. You may go on and on condemning Jung's dubious method of guiding a few women through their crucibles. The more christian or excessively virtuous one's consciousness, the more heathenish his unconscious behaves. Anyone in our culture really trying to live up to its demands, must bear a malignant violation of his nature in his unconscious.
serpentineflame 1 year ago
@serpentineflame "Indeed, the structure of the psyche is so contrapuntal that one can scarcely make any psychological assertion or general statement without having immediately to state its opposite." --Jung, CW16, par.177 Jung is presenting a thermodynamic view of the human psyche, thereby creating the illusion that what he is saying is scientific when in fact it is not. Clever way to avoid criticism. One's criticism of Jung is in direct proportion to their uncomscious inferiorities.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@serpentineflame In other words, if I criticize Jung, or if Bair criticizes Jung, or if McKlynn criticizes Jung, the problem lies with us. We are compensating for our own unconscious inferiorities. There's nothing wrong with Jung and his lies and his ethical violations.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 No, you're still WRONG
serpentineflame 1 year ago
@serpentineflame Nice comeback. Quite articulate.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Thank You
serpentineflame 1 year ago
@serpentineflame I was being sarcastic.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 So was I
serpentineflame 1 year ago
@serpentineflame You are pro-Jung, I am anti-Jung. The game is a draw. Would you prefer a nice game of chess?
Darrell861 1 year ago
@serpentineflame Oh, and one more thing. No one has the ability to interpret other people's dreams. Not Jung or anyone. Dream interpretation is the oldest hoax in the world. Jung got away with that scam for decades. But I'm not going to change your mind and you are not going to change mine.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 We have already discussed that and I have already rejected that statement of yours before. Thanks for the chess offer. Live long and prosper.
serpentineflame 1 year ago
@serpentineflame Thanks, ye follower of Carl Jung. Live long and prosper being naive and gullible.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Attempt to do something productive with the husk of your life.
serpentineflame 1 year ago
@serpentineflame The husk of my life. Good one. Poetic. I'll have to put that on my witty comebacks document.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@serpentineflame It is logistically impossible to meet 11 new people a day 7 days a week for 730 consecutive days, much less interpret their dreams. Jung lied in 1957. He was testing the gullibility of his followers. The term is "confidence trickery." Jung didn't have the ability to interpret even one dream of another person. No one does. If one wants to interpret one's own dreams, fine. But to interpret the dreams of clients in a licensed profession is unethical.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@serpentineflame Oh, and another thing. Jung invented the shadow. If one is not a Jungian, then there is no shadow. I do know how to read, and I can teach someone how to make spaghetti and meatballs. Jung has a lot of people fooled, including you.
Darrell861 1 year ago
All of it is genius! "we know nothing of man" is a sad truth. He should be studied.
huxley76 1 year ago
dude! that gives me shivers.
1schwererziehbar1 1 year ago
we will never grasp this within the human race, but i am glad to see all the open minded people on here, thumbs up to you all.
123serioussam 1 year ago
"We are so full of aprehensions (and) fears that one doesn't know exactly to what it points. One thing is sure .. a great change of our psychological attitude is imanent."
"..because the only real danger that exists is man himself. He is the great danger, and we are pitifully unaware of it."
Hyperluminal 1 year ago
What a beautiful person. Thanks for posting this.
blackmajek 1 year ago
i loved his last words ... Man cant stand a meaningless life .. Bless u :)
israeli0music0rulez 1 year ago
"We need more understanding of human nature, because the only real danger that exists is Man himself." 1:27
CornsilkSW 1 year ago
@CornsilkSW Jung was a master at coming up with cliches that have no practical application. He has said, " Show me a sane man and I will cure him." He was not kidding. He regarded everyone in the world as having some sort of problem. He created problems where there were none, thereby setting himself up as the solution. His invention of the shadow was a scare tactic. Gurus like Jung and Jim Jones used scare tactics to intice and intimidate their followers, who beecome dependent upon the guru.
Darrell861 1 year ago
Maybe when we get to the other side we can talk with both Dr. Jung and Elisabeth Kubler-Ross, wouldn't that be exhilarating?!
I hope they stick around long enough for me to find them both... don't reincarnate, you two, WAIT FOR MEEEEEE!!!
mysticpamela 2 years ago
u cud be him! i cud be her!
he cud have been michael jackson!
Rasabihariji 2 years ago
there will be a reaction to all of what's meaningless.
SagaSudaka 2 years ago
Thanks for sharing.
TonyBtheEG 2 years ago
Thanks for posting these!
InitiumThoth 2 years ago
Very interesting but a lot of silly questions !
alfrismar 2 years ago
This last part, when he told what he could predict about other great war (trought dreams) and he said wasn't clear enough... was that a possible prediction of the confuse conflict in cold war and the Cuba missiles (where US an URSS almost began another world war), where in the end nothing happens?
Great post.
Eyelash85 2 years ago
He responded to the question by saying that because people in the modern era live with such fear and apprehension (likely implying socially and politically) that visions or dreams of war are not directly indicative of a coming war, as they may have once been. War as an internal symbol can be deeply personal. IMO, I don't think the answer could be unquestionably linked to the Cuban Missile Crisis.
InitiumThoth 2 years ago 3
Thanks for answering, and I think you are right. Peace be upon You!
Eyelash85 2 years ago
Great post !
artemis12061966 2 years ago
Glad I could look through that window ;-)
nocturnal108z 2 years ago
Thanks for posting!
MrCyberGJnr 2 years ago
great video's it gives you a better understanding of some of his theories.
kofimandingo 2 years ago
What an incredible man Dr. Jung was. Pity he is no longer around.
KrazyDukMan 2 years ago 6
@KrazyDukMan The man is gone.. The things he taught those around him will echo for eternity.. That is immortality..
Vatoaztecas 1 year ago
Alguem pode legendar essas entrevisatas de JUng? é importantissimo para nós aprendizes da psicologia junguiana, grata
yesterapy1 2 years ago
McCain Palin 2012
(just kidding)
meazor1967 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Archaic thinking . Let's evolve , shall we ?
CommercialVehicle 2 years ago
Someone who appears never to have heard 'Better to keep one's mouth shut and be thought a fool, rather than open it and remove all doubt'.
PSmithFortyTwo 2 years ago
He was talking about how "today" we are living in a fear paradigm that "one doesn't know to what it points". That's pretty insightful.
TheAmorphousCreature 2 years ago 2
what does the one hand clapping sound like?... Insightful...
444DeanMachine 2 years ago 2
If enough people think of a war, then a war will happen...
archimech1138 2 years ago
What if in a prison all the inmates thought of escaping, would their wish come true?
DefenceSpeech 2 years ago
Many inmates are in prison because that is the manifestation of the psychic and mental cage and chains they were in already. The imprisoned soul leads to an incarcerated body.
OKandNOWwhat 2 years ago
So suicide yourself and free your soul and your mind!
DefenceSpeech 2 years ago
I Am free. And it was by dying to self ("suicide yourself") that I received my full freedom. Live long.
OKandNOWwhat 2 years ago 2
Or would it not work for they are still wishing to "escape"?
nocturnal108z 2 years ago
I find the physche a fascinating subject . An example of my fascination is this !
Today I tethered my dog to a free standing swing board outside a post office,at that exact moment i was over whelmed with an image of my dog running after a cat whilst still attached .I entered the post office & within seconds my dog was running barking down the street dragging the sign.Did I predict the future event ?Did I manifest it ?or was it just the one of many consequential outcomes that was possible?
splatuality 2 years ago
You're aware of the future, deja vu and phenomena like it have been proven.
I've had many instances like this.
I think it's all being pulled along rather than pushed along because if it were pushed there would be no possibility of precognition.
However if it's all pulled.
MMMmmm.......
smudge6699 2 years ago
"Man cannot stand a meaningless life."
MsGlobalExplorer 2 years ago 10
Whereas Jung feared the "nullification of man" this nihilist project is actually realized by Skinner who says "I am sometimes asked "Do you think of yourself as you think of organisms you study?" The answer is yes. So far as I know, my behavior at any given moment has been nothing more than the product of my genetic endowment, my personal history, and the current setting...If I am right about human behavior, I have written the autobiography of a nonperson" (Khon PUNISHED BY REWARDS 7).
mitohistoriador 3 years ago
Tell that to the behavior analysts & for that matter the many psychiatrists who now give their patients behavioral homework & other such tasks based on behavioral research.
Someone who cares about practical design ends up with real data proves something. Kind of like an engineer.
ABA and behavior modification is a science.
Neither you nor I can prove a soul or difference from man relative to another organism.
I'm done here.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Than you. We are done here with you and Skinner and his so-called psychology of pigeons and rats. This is after all a Jung playlist. I suggest you go to Skinner's clips to continue discussing him, as you have certainly done.
An engineer is not a scientist any more than a computer technician, and neither is Skinner a true scientist but a technician for "crowd control" and brainwashing.
Good riddance Skinner, may he rest in peace with your Biblical dogs.
mitohistoriador 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
There's hard evidence proving Bible is accurate like video "Revealing God's Treasure - Red Sea Crossing" here on You Tube, but knowledge of this data is required to know, by this data, God exists.
The only thing known at all times in life is yourself. This data on yourself can only drive you to the correct religion if your thinking of this knowledge is accurate & that being Psalms 51:17 as any works based religion takes initial data & disregards it.
SELAH - talk with God
SHALOM - peace
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Skinner studied man accurately & concludes correctly on morals & freedom. Wrong only on philosophy. Man is not a "caged ape," but rather able to condition more fully by thought then by action in environment. Thought is controlled by external stimulus, but thought conditions more. Free will is merely a sharpened discriminative control.
Ray, B. (1969) Selective attention: the effects of combining stimuli which control incompatible behavior. J. of the Exp. Analysis of Beh., 12, 539-550.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
The medicine is prepared too late, when the illness has grown strong by long delay.
serpentineflame 3 years ago
Jung did not "prove" a single thing, but everything he said is true; Skinner proved everything, but everything he proved is not true. "This is especially true since science is not really after truth, not even after correctness, but only after reliability and predictability (which is something very different)" (as Wolfgang Giegerich in THE SOUL'S LOGICAL LIFE 218), a Jungian psychologist, said.
mitohistoriador 3 years ago
I suppose ABAisSCIENCE has been "conditioned" to believe in Skinner dogmas by a superstitious belief in the "scientific method", or better THE RELIGION OF TECHNOLOGY as David Noble has called it in a book where he shows how these two lunacies blend into a single madness without contradiction: Xn dominionist fundamentalism and the worship of science and technology. But behaviorist ψ only shows how to control people like cattle, something it never quite accomplishes for there is always remainder.
mitohistoriador 3 years ago
Those who accuse Jung of not being "scientific" obviously have the most narrow conception of science governed by quantitative criteria, as if the 'human sciences' (Geisteswissenschaften) can be subsummed under brain chemistry or some non-sense like that. Take poetry and now imagine a Skinnerean lunkhead try to explain it by means of "conditioning" or "reinforcement" in a "scientific" way. Quantum Physics should have taught these brain-scientist the epistemological humility of the Uncertainty Pri
mitohistoriador 3 years ago
Skinner's right about morals & freedom. Wrong only on philosophy. Man is not a "caged ape," but rather able to condition more fully by thought then by action in environment. Still thought is controlled by external stimulus, but thought conditions more. Hence your free will is merely a sharpened discriminative control.
Ray, B. (1969) Selective attention: the effects of combining stimuli which control incompatible behavior. J. of the Exp. Analysis of Beh., 12, 539-550.
Now is it interesting?
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
I suppose ABAisSCIENCE have been "conditioned" to believe in Skinner by a superstitious belief in the "scientific method", what is called scientism, or better THE RELIGION OF TECHNOLOGY as David Noble has called it in a book where he shows how his two lunacies blend into one without contradiction: Xn dominionist fundamentalism and the worship of science and technology. For that is why he keeps arguing as thus: Skinner is everything because his ψ shows how to control people like cattle
mitohistoriador 3 years ago
Mitohistoriador,
Can I add this series is enlightening and interesting?
Still the man proved nothing scientifically and I don't see anyone arguing with me on this or offering something mainly because Jung has proven nothing scientifically.
As much as any words can be cool or inspire watch the videos, but if you want to learn about man which Jung implies is important might I suggest to you Dr. B. F. Skinner?
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
You really are an interesting psycho case, a perfect dissociation between an atheist scientistic ψ and a primitive belief in the Religion of the Middle Ages--much like saying: I am an atheist and a Xn fundamentalist. Your utopian belief in science really belongs in the 19th century, the heyday of scientific materialism. I'm sure you know all about the epistemological problems of QED, in view of which the very EXISTENCE of matter cannot be "proven" scientifically?
mitohistoriador 3 years ago
"Only as a psychology "with truth" can psychology gain the status of a theoretical discipline. And only as a theoretical one can it be in the wild. Without it, it is inevitably a mere technique, something you do (action!) to achieve practical results, despite all disclaimers." (Giegerich THE SOUL'S LOGICAL LIFE 218). In other words, when the question of Truth is reserved for Religion then ψ becomes mere behaviorism, the "science" of the last man.
mitohistoriador 3 years ago
Are you sure that man isn't like a dog.
Luke 12:5 is equal to Matthew 10:28; thus, showing that the Nazi like a dog will go into the Earth with no eternal life.
Maybe Skinner is right.
I enjoyed the debate, but Skinner has the science behind him and Jung said nothing or proved nothing scientifically about man.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
I think Khon nailed it on the head when he said "The one real insight about Skinner that came to me after talking with him for a while was that he was less a theorist than a technician. The man was fascinated-indeed almost obsessed-with practical problems of design" (PUNISHED BY REWARDS 280). Because he was a technocrat Skinner's half-baked theory gives itself airs of scientificity, much as a "computer scientist" does, although they're both no more than technicians.
mitohistoriador 3 years ago 2
ABA, you are massively contradicting yourself at every turn. Quoting the bible all the time proves how you have been conditioned and nothing more. Stimulus Response is proven and exploited to condition society, indeed, but whether what is being conditioned is moral is the real question. Can you deny this?
Do you believe that those who have the ability to condition the masses are moral or with so much power, inevitably corrupt with power?
Hmmmm....
archimech1138 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Man is not moral. That is why all fall short my good friend. Can you operationalize morality? Can you get your fingers around morals or free will?
ABAisSCIENCE 2 years ago
If skinner and behaviorism work so well. Why do we still have things like the terrible 2s? Things like these should have been eliminated. Behaviorism has been wrong and insufficient as much as it has been right useful.
notreason 3 years ago
For any one who still swallows Skinnerean mythology, I recommend PUNISHED BY REWARDS by Khon, who shows how behaviorism undermines the moral and philosophical existence of real human beings.
mitohistoriador 3 years ago
Normally, One would hesitate before making qualitative statements about the Unconscious when one has had no considerable experience with which to observe it and therefore has absolutely no evidence with which to refute its objectivity. THAT would be Pathetically unscientific not to mention Pompously Misanthropic.
serpentineflame 3 years ago
Do reveal your truth if you have some.
I'm all for the truth being brought out for all to hear so don't keep your candle in the dark or under something bring it out to bless people mmariebored.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Trudl Junge, Hitler's former personal secretary, noted the Führer's success came with his ability to manipulate other people's conscience. On a vast scale, German people no longer knew right from wrong. Koonz presents a compelling argument to suggest that Junge was in some degree right. The Germans did not surrender their conscience but submitted to transformation away from conventional Western notions of right & wrong to a radical, racial nationalism's actions & outcomes. - J. Kleiman
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Sabina Spielrein corresponded & influenced Jung & Freud in their development of psychoanalytic theory (Carotenuto, 1980). Piaget was personally analyzed by Sabina Spielrein in the 1920s. Sabina Spielrein had a relationship with Jung & Piaget (with Jung while his patient). She was 2nd woman to be admitted to Wednesday Psychological Society, in November 1911 (Freud, 1910-1911/1979; Spielrein, 1912). Through Russian Psychoanalytic Society gave several lectures attended by Vygotsky in 1923.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
At the end he speaks a bit of truth.
Man will not stand for his nullification as in Revelations 13:16-19 and man will fight against it such that Matthew 24:21-22.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
He speaks true here, "We need more understanding of human nature because the only real danger that exists is man himself."
He speaks true that he knows nothing on it.
B. F. Skinner did create a scientific way to understand man that has merit, but the philosophy of B. F. Skinner is inaccurate.
The fact is that Zechariah 12:10 can't be explained by Applied Behavior Analysis or conditioning and can't be explained by evolution or the survival of the fittest type logic either.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
"Can't be explained"? Any Joe Shmoe can see a disaster coming(disasters happen in cycles for every nation) and write in a book that God did it because of this or that evil...
You have a lot of nerve pointing out his honest and HUMBLE admission to his own falibility when you can't even think outside of the Bible's guidelines. When he said man was his own danger, he was talking about people like you, who want to shut up learning into one outdated book.
mmariebored 3 years ago
Jung's work inaccurate; B. F. Skinner did create a science to understand man. Man is conditioned to perform. Do you think after WWII conditioning disappeared? No. Do you think that holocausts in Africa have used technology? No. What will the future bring? Man is wicked & so with technology in future I would think "no flesh" will be the call of the day. If you wish to say that doesn't prove the Bible so be it, "but do not doubt that you are a killer, Louie." (Interview with the Vampire)
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
Humans are survival creatures, yes, and I don't deny "conditioning". I know that the holocaust in Africa was programmed into those men, there are documents on their radio broadcasts telling the soldiers how to kill the people in a way that would make them suffer the most, they were instructed. And just google "History of PSYOP". Man has always been manipulated, man is not the "evil" the manipulators claim them to be. They do that to justify controlling them, for their own personal gain.
mmariebored 3 years ago
Well, believe me you have to do some conditioning prior to describing how to kill to get killing behavior, but are you trying to say that man is so programmed there is no accountability at all?
Perhaps B. F. Skinner would say man is a "caged ape" but I belief there is sharpened discriminative control or mindfulness and thus man is accountable or man therefore is the "evil." In your account is not man the programmer as much as the responder?
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
In YOUR account, you're saying that ALL men are "evil". I'm saying that there are men currupted by greed behind the scenes conditionaing the minds of who they consider "caged apes", less than the human they see themselves as. It's about greed. It's about population control, Babel was a good example of this, and, why do you suppose it was so important for King David not to "number the people"? You're not ready to see the truth.
mmariebored 3 years ago
With Verichip the Jew can be eliminated in less than a week till there are only 144,000 left breathing on the Earth.
All men are evil. The controllers as you seem to see them are also conditioned by the environment. They are also human & though they may be more evil it is merely a human condition of us all. Of humans it can be said there is nothing good in them save unless they start to sharpen their discriminative control towards what some might call morals.
Even those ones sin in life.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
So you're one of those people who teaches the Verichip is the "mark of the beast" when in reality it's the same as a S.S. number and if you don't have one because you were afraid to get one due to the population-controlling LIE that it's evil and going to kill you, then you WON'T be able to function on the planet and yes you WILL be "eliminated" because you'll end up starving to death due to your own stubornness.
mmariebored 3 years ago
Smart logic. If you think I need to number myself like a Jew in holocaust otherwise let me die I suggest you deep freeze me now because when people care so little about life things get scarce. Did you ever think about how many meals you can get out of a holocaust survivor? Deep freeze me now & more meals can be prepared. I'm writing merely to warn that "ultimate power corrupts" & I doubt a universal control will make Germany love Jews or avoid wars. Why allow others control of your country?
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
truly, this line is better not crossed.
please don't go here ABAisSCIENCE, you've no clue about the ecology of genocide, you speak with little to no authority on this subject. PLEASE leave topics like this to the experts.
thank you.
I'd really prefer to have an intelligent conversion @ Jung, not your needling every vid. What have you to proove? Do you think all psychs are ignorant of Skinner? That Skinner is EVERYTHING? I met him in 1989-how old were you then, what was your world?
chickenjojo 3 years ago
If "all men are evil", you need to read some Philip Zimbardo. I promise, you will not be disappointed; I suspect if you research his career, you might find him to be of equal (if not better because he's still living [know your history of science]) scientific rigor. His experiments opened to the door to automaticity, which I believe Skinner would find valid today.
In the end, psychology is nothing if it can't account for everything; theoretical diversity is quite helpful.
chickenjojo 3 years ago
"With Verichip the Jew can be eliminated in less than a week till there are only 144,000 left breathing on the Earth."
if this means what i think it does, it appears you've resisted the shadow to the point it's overcome your moral compass. have you insight into the complexes that plague you? if not, i'd strongly recommend you seek insight (not merely succorance nor hyperinflection).
eliminating Jews? Are you serious? I've read much Skinner but never anything about genocide. You serious?
chickenjojo 3 years ago
Chickenjojo, Skinner doesn't write of Jewish holocausts period, but they happen on Earth and Skinner would describe it relative to conditioning no doubt.
Why allow technology to bring down walls?
Are we to assume that war will be irrelevant without walls? Are we to be stronger in a specific country for bringing them down?
Are we at peace or moving towards it by conditioning in this last century such that trust is good?
Should the Jew trust men? Does behavior show conditioning for trust?
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago
first, mentioning the Shoah was from you, not I.
secondly, I can't decipher what it is you are trying to say; your axe-grinding against Jung isn't consistent with the content of this most recent post. please get your cards straight.
thirdly, brief yourself on recent neurological research on cooperation, jealousy, selflessness, and "I".
fourth, PLEASE read some Zimbardo. I promise, he will not disappoint.
fifth, it's strange you perceive me as a threat.
chickenjojo 3 years ago
Jung is allowed to be right philosophically or morally or about an aspect of thinking relative to meaning, but that has nothing to do with scientificially describing, controlling, or understanding man externally or internally.
ABAisSCIENCE 3 years ago