when i hear about the future i always think off that sponge bob episode where the flying dutch man gives them three wishes and then patrick wastes a wish saying he wish he knew that earlier.
@QuantumProphet Not at all. I really couldn't understand because of the audio. I found other clips on the tube, this guy C. G. Jung & this guy is awesome!
@QuantumProphet какие "факты нло" обнаружили здешние комменторы - не понимаю. все кадры - фэйк. показания бёрда - засекречены. всё, что я тут реально увидел - недоработанный аппарат на воздушной подушке, который не может даже подняться над землёй выше, чем на полметра. "вынырнуть из-под воды" возле антарктиды такое г..вно точно не смогло бы. брэхняаа.
I thank Carl Jung for hooking psychology up with spirituality/alchemy/strange archetype ideas. Too bad psychologists today don't dabble in the supplimental spiritual aspect of his design!! haha
The title is somewhat misleading. Jung is not suggesting that Alchemy can magically predict the future, but that understanding alchemy as a cultural and historical phenomenon with certain psychologically significant elements (which Jung refers to as "Archetypes") we can better explain and therefore predict future modes of human behavior.
@FreshNorman Archtypes- grouping people to classes; similiar habits and then predict what they will do if they have more resources,etc in the future. I common example is setting the earth up with only 100 people on it using the set to represent 7 billion people.
It's quite possible that I have a misunderstanding to the regarded subject, but it seems absurd to hold a position that states that human nature, or "pyschological functions" are dependent upon color. If this proposition is true, then we must admit that blind people, who see no color (except for blackness, which isn't included), are deficient of cognitive and pyschological functions. But this conclusion is absurd: many blind people are highly capable of all the listed "pyschological functions."
@ANDROID697 Of course they do. It's not a question whether the blind dream or not, its what is it they dream about. Color is only understood through the senses (i.e sight). Sure, they can say the word "red," but the word is meaningless to them. This brings us back to my argument: If "pyschological functions" are dependent upon the "pyscological primary colors," then the blind, who neither see nor understand color, have no "psychological functions." But isn't this conclusion completely absurd?
@Howsonify I think the color red is red, the word red is meaningless its just used to describe and organize what we experience from sight. It is impossible to know whether a blind person has the color red in his mind when he talks of the color red. He might be thinking of blue, purple, orange, yellow.....mentally any one can picture the color red but if you want to associate it with something physical or sensible then that takes something experienceable by sight.
@freudian456 I pretty much agree with everything your saying, but let's be clear about this. Consider a 100% blind man, who has been so his whole life. We know that color is only understood by experiencing it through sight. Moreover, colors cannot be compared, associated, described or reasoned about without this form of experience: sight. How, then, could this man even speak of color as we, the not blind, do? He can't. Read Aristotle's posts then my posts to see why were speaking of colors.
@Howsonify 'How, then, could this man even speak of color as we, the not blind, do?'
Your right, he cant. However this doesn't mean that he can not have a mental 'picture' of the color red. Our experience of the color red by sight is only good for organization purposes and attributions made to our environment. You couldn't prove whether a blind person is talking of red, just like you cant prove whether a normal person has any thought in his mind's eye, hitherto.
"you're so crazy" represents what american media usually label celebrities as, when these smart, creative people are used by same industry try to exploit to push american consumerism and materialism. These people were made a star, like Lucifer, the Morning Star, and I'm not even religious, I believe religion is man-made but the presence of a greater entity, good and evil, is definitely present.
"I was always looking for some inbetween. You know, something that links the remote past with the present moment." I don't care how many books this man has written, or how important he may be to modern psychology, anyone who practices the scientific method and then turns around and makes an overt historicist claim is out of their mind and should be also out of a job.
@Howsonify Yes, Jung was out of his mind. Yet he was also a skillfull guru who had many people fooled. Give the guy credit for that. His historic claims are based on inductive logic. He decided which symbols he chose and then made them mean what he wanted them to mean.
@Darrell861 Perhaps you're right. Jung does deserves credit for his wild imagination, the kind of imagination that would make even Peter Pan jealous. I've always wondered why Allen Bloom-the American, platonist philosopher- called pyschology 'morally bankrupt and inept of true knowledge.' I now think he had Jung in mind when he said that satement. I, however, like the scientifically supported pyschology, but not psychology supported by one's imagination, mysticism and metaphysical perspectives.
@Howsonify Speaking of Plato, Jung presented archetypes as if they existed in a platonic realm in and of themselves. His theory of archetypes has no practical application. It is a form of mysticism. But he is quite entertaining in the way he and his followers find ways of putting their foot in their mouth.
@Darrell861 There is no form of mysticism. What sort of issue do you have with archetypes, is it a mind-matter issue? Seriously? You are the only person with his foot in his mouth, you haven't brought up anything convincing, no argument worth considering.
@07Aristotle “I have made it a rule to remind myself that I can never understand somebody else’s dream well enough to interpret it correctly.” –Carl Jung, Man And His Symbols, p. 42, 1959
“At that time [1907] I analyzed at least four thousand dreams a year.”–Carl Jung, Collected Works, vol. 3, par. 557, 1957. These are examples of Jung putting his foot in his mouth.
@Darrell861 'I have made it a rule to remind myself that I can never understand somebody else’s dream well enough to interpret it correctly'
Also on pg 42 Man and His Symbols states, ''it is obvious if you assume(the dreamer) that the dream is symbolic, you will interpret it differently from somebody else that the essential energizing thought or emotion is KNOWN already and "disguised" by the dream. In the latter case, dream interpretation little sense, for you find what you already know.''
@07Aristotle That's like saying there are multiple ways of analyzing blood samples for DNA. The technician can match a sample with anyone he wants. Also, at least 4000 dreams a year comes out to at least 8000 dreams over two years. That's 11 dreamsa day, 7 days a week for 730 consecutive days. Not only is Jung lying, but he's operating on the faulty premise that all dreams have meaning in the first place. No one taught Jung how to interpret dreams.
@Darrell861 'That's 11 dreamsa day, 7 days a week for 730 consecutive days.'
This is presumptuous.
'Not only is Jung lying, but he's operating on the faulty premise that all dreams have meaning in the first place. No one taught Jung how to interpret dreams. '
?? Look up online, dream dictionary, you can have your dreams interpreted for free and no interpreter needed, yet its the same thing as an interpreter doing it for you. No one is lying.
@07Aristotle Mary Ann Mattoon wrote that it takes a minimum of two one-hour sessions for the analyst to interpret just one dream (Understanding Dreams, p.10). Reductio ad absurdum, Jung spent 22 hours a day, 7 days a week for two years doing nothing but interpreting dreams. This leaves him two hours a day to eat, sleep, work on word association tests, and trim his fingernails.
@07Aristotle There was no internet in 1907. It is logistically impossible just to meet 11 new people a day, much less have them come prepared with a dream text. Jung was a confidence trickster. Like Jim Jones, he tested the gullibility of his followers to see how outrageous a lie he could tell without being challenged
@Darrell861 What I was implying, by the dream dictionary, was that it does not need to take 2hrs to interpret your dream, you can do it yourself , no interpreter required. I don't know where mattoon got such a statistic but it is a fact that it does not take 2hrs to interpret a dream. It does not matter whether someone is interpreting or your doing the interpreting the dream. The dream content does not magically change when the client hands over the material to the therapist.
@07Aristotle The only person who has the ability to interpret dreams is the person who experienced the dream. Yet a pervading theme inJungian literature isthat one must not interpret their own dreams. As of 1978 Mattoon was regarded as the foremost expert on everything Jungever said about dreams. As for the two hours, she made it up off the top of her head, like practically all of Jungian literature on dreams.
@Darrell861 'The only person who has the ability to interpret dreams is the person who experienced the dream.'
Right, yet I can get a dream dictionary online and do it myself. It does not matter if a therapist is there or not the interpretation is the same either way.
'As for the two hours, she made it up off the top of her head'
I knew it, it was definitely made of the top of someones head.
@Darrell861 There is no benefit in tricking when you can do the interpretation yourself. Last time I checked therapists don't offer dream interpretations as a service, because it can be done in a short amount of time. In 1907 he began his correspondence with Freud and submitted an article to him on the topic of dementia. Indeed, I would be gullible in believing your short-sighted confabulations which have no substance.
@07Aristotle Jung said that dream interpretation is always a dialectical process between two people. Marie-Louise von Franz said that it's not a good idea to interpret your own dreams. Daryl Sharp said that if you think you've understood the meaning of a dream immediately upon waking chances are you're mistaken. James Hall said that Jungians are particularly strong at interpreting dreams. This all amounts to Jungian elitism.
@Darrell861 Fact is is that I can go online and use the dream dictionary to interpret my dreams, without interpreting them from just what I know. I can use the dream dictionary to interpret my dreams, no therapist required. According to Jung, active imagination is "a dialectical procedure, a dialogue between yourself and the unconscious figures" and not dream interpretation.
@07Aristotle Dream dictionaries are nothing more than forms of entertainment. On p.134-136 of Memories Dreams Reflections Jung took dream interpretation so seriously that he made it a requirement that one must submit a dream sample to him. It was a prerequisite for becoming an analyst. The case study here did not involve an unconscious figure. It involves a person.
@Darrell861 Unconscious figures are unconscious figures. Von Franz, Sharp and Hall were not talking of unconscious figures. The dream dictionary is not a form of entertainment but a tool used for dream interpretation. Unconscious figures are in active imagination and not in therapy.
@07Aristotle In 1900 Gustav Hindman Miller published "The Dictionary of Dreams: 10,000 dreams Interpreted. Today the book is obsolete. It makes no mention of dreams aout cars, airplanes and computers.
@Darrell861 The Dictionary of Dreams: 10,000 dreams Interpreted by Gustave Miller is based on religion rather than psychology, with attention paid to The Bible and the role dreams played throughout. Dream psychology is mainstream, and religious dream interpretation is on the fringe, this book's title is misrepresentative.
'It makes no mention of dreams aout cars, airplanes and computers.'
It is impossible to JUST dream about cars, airplanes and computers.
@Darrell861 Active imagination did not require another person. Dream Interpretation did not require another person, though it does not matter, the interpretation is still the same.
@07Aristotle Jung and Jolande Jacobi were talkingofff thet op of their heads they said that the color red in dreams represnts the feeling function. There are four dominant functions, yet only three primary collors.Feeling has red and blue has thinking. That leaves sensation and intuition to fight over yellow. .
@Darrell861 No, there is four; blue, red, yellow and green. Jung postulated four basic psychological functions: thinking, feeling, intuition, and sensation. These are the four ways in which each individual orients himself to his experience. While every individual carries the potential for all four modes, one mode is used more habitually than the others, and the individual may be said to be a type: a
“thinking type,” “feeling type,” “sensation type,” or “intuitive type.”
@Darrell861 This correlation closely based on simple logic between the four functions of consciousness and the four psychological primary colors: red, blue, green, and yellow. Red= Feeling, Blue=Thinking, Green=Sensation, Yellow=Intuition. This is based of his personality typology. There is no fighting over yellow.
@07Aristotle So if some guy dreams about the red car his dad drove when he was a kid, then he is dreaming about the feeling function (?) Green is not a primary color. It is a blend of yellow and blue. Assigning a color to thef our dominant. functions is window dressing which has no meaning.
@07Aristotle Jacobi's contribution to Man And His Symbols is a lengthy nine month analysis of a client she calls Henry. It is unethical to diclose intimate facts about a client. There is no indication that Henry gave his permission for this disclusure. In one of the dreams Henry dreams he wants to climb the Zinalrothorn. Jacobi draws attention to the central syllable "rot." and says that since it translates into red then the mountain represents the feeling function.
@Darrell861 'It is unethical to diclose intimate facts about a client. There is no indication that Henry gave his permission for this disclusure'
Again, this is an assumption. How are you certain they did not omit it?
" The word rot ("red) in zinalrothorn touches on Henry's emotional problem. Red is usually symbolic for feeling or passion; here it points to the feeling function, which was insufficiently developed in Henry'' Pg 331-334
@Darrell861 'So if some guy dreams about the red car his dad drove when he was a kid, then he is dreaming about the feeling function (?) '
Yep, this is a psychological fact.
'Green is not a primary color. It is a blend of yellow and blue. Assigning a color to thef our dominant. functions is window dressing which has no meaning.'
Its based on Primary Color OF PERSONALITY, based on Jung's personality typology. Blue, Red, Yellow, and Green. It has meaning. Read more.
@Darrell861 Mary Ann Mattoon wrote that it takes a minimum of two one-hour sessions for the analyst to interpret just one dream (Understanding Dreams, p.10). Reductio ad absurdum, Jung spent 22 hours a day, 7 days a week for two years doing nothing but interpreting dreams. This leaves him two hours a day to eat, sleep, work on word association tests, and trim his fingernails.
@Darrell861 Mary Ann Mattoon wrote that it takes a minimum of two one-hour sessions for the analyst to interpret just one dream (Understanding Dreams, p.10). Reductio ad absurdum, Jung spent 22 hours a day, 7 days a week for two years doing nothing but interpreting dreams. This leaves him two hours a day to eat, sleep, work on word association tests, and trim his fingernails.
@Howsonify 'Jung does deserves credit for his wild imagination, the kind of imagination that would make even Peter Pan jealous'
''Active Imagination'', you mean.
'Allen Bloom-the American, platonist philosopher- called pyschology 'morally bankrupt and inept of true knowledge.' I now think he had Jung in mind when he said that satement'
According to The Closing of the American Mind by Allan Bloom Pg. 136-7 he was criticizing Freud because be proposed the sexual instinct as man's main drive
@07Aristotle Perhaps "Active Imigination" is the better word here, but looking at its meaning, the term denotes far more then what I intended when I had said that.
Yes, it was from Bloom's "The Closing of the American Mind" that I was paraphrasing from memory. But it wasn't from those pages (look at page 121). Looking back now over the material, my words "morally bankrupt" and "inept of true knowledge" were a bit stronger than Bloom would have used. As for Jung's connection, it was a joke.
@Howsonify ,he thought that Freud promoted 'psychology without the psyche', which was not concerned with the 'real self'. He believed that 'Freud did not give a satisfying account of all the things that we experienced'. He was not thinking about Jung, but Freud. He believed we needed more of the soul in psychology.
@Imbude74 If archetypes are not innate, then they can be invented. The question becomes, just what is the upper limit. Or, the Hero Archetype can change into The Inner Gourmet archetype. Or the Inner Cat Lover.
@Darrell861 Jung had a strong imagination but he was limited by the technology and knowledge of his time and perhaps also limited by certain beliefs he had, so his mind had nothing it could do but imagine.
@NebunLaCap If Jung was limited by the technology and knowledge of his time and perhaps by certain beliefs, then he couldn't have the ability to interpret dreams. For that, he used his strong imagination. He made dreams mean what he wanted them to mean.
Very interesting what C.J. says about archetypes .... I have been a member of ManKind Project for 5 years now, and unknowingly, was exposed to Alchemy principles ..... we strive to live in the present, thus putting our past in the past, thus allowing the possibility of looking to the future, our future, and creating a more fulfilling life, realizing our true potential, as opposed to being consumed with the fear of death and not contributing to this world.
@reevox In his 1990 book "Homcoming: Reclaiming And Championing Your Inner Child" John Bradshaw said, "I believe the inner wounded child has become a modern archetype." A recent edition of the New Orleans C.G. Jung Society Newsletter spoke of "the archetype of the kiss." One TV commercial referred to the "Inner Gourmet" in all of us. If archetypes are innate, then these three apply to neolithic Man. If not, they are invented ad hoc by anyone wanting to sell something.
Fortune tellers can use palmistry or astrology or Tarot to predict the future. Fine. But dream interpretation and alchemy to predict the future in the practice of psychiatry? Huh? Dream interpretation has been going on for thousands of years, yet it has no underlying structure. All dream interpreters (including Jung) have been and are self-proclaimed.
@NebunLaCap There's nothing wrong with dreaming. It's a natural human function. Keeping a dream journal is a great expository writing excercise. No one is obligated to write their dreams down. But if one is under pressure from a psychiatrist to write their dreams down, that pressure might affect the content of the dream. No one taught Jung how to interpret dreams, yet he convinced himself and his followers that he did have that ability. That claim is fraudulent.
@Darrell861 You can interpret them though and what they might but everyone will probably have the same meaning dreams at one point or another. For example, your in a fight and you can't swing. It may mean you have recently been in a position where you felt you had no control, and your mind is going through memory reconsolidation, or perhaps your mind is just going through its routine desensitization so you don't show weakness when you find yourself in a position where you lack control you want
@NebunLaCap Jung made dreams mean what he wanted them to mean. A DNA expert does not testify in court by saying, "Maybe, perhaps, uhh..sometimes... for example..." You just made up your interpretations off the top of your head of hypothetical dreams of fictional people you have never met. You are arguing the same way as Jung. You have demonstrated my point. Once again, no on ever taught Jung how to interpret dreams.
@Darrell861 Arguing? LOL how can you argue with the same beliefs? I was supporting what you where saying about Jung. His shit was fantasy. I only said it MAY mean because there may be different reasons your brain is doing that but you are still reconsolidating memory.
It's okay if someone talks about predicting the future and also claims to have the ability to interpret dreams. It's okay if someone wants to be a guru and have others follow him and not question him. But if the same person wants to become a psychiatrist/psychotherapist... NOT OKAY. The client can become intimidated, and allow the therapist to manipulate him. Jung spread himself too thin.
@Darrell861 Too thin? I wonder. Jung spent a great number of years, untold hours, sorting out his thoughts and making his connections. We don't have to agree with those conclusions, but certainly we can be aroused by his way of seeing.
@PoliticalPars Yes, too thin. If one wants to be a psychotherapist he should focus on his profession. Dream interpretaion, predicting the future, as well as other forms of divination have no place in such a licensed profession. Jung claimed to be an expert on everything he put his hands on: divination, paranormal phenomena, the battle between Good and Evil, comparative religion, psychological types and so on. In that respect Dr. Phil does the same. Both do so at the exppense of ethics.
@Darrell861 Fatter than most people achieve.....probably even most psychotherapists. The mind is not an isolated object, it is connected and conditioned by the world. An understanding of the world will aid psychotherapy just as vice versa would be true.
@lordandy8 Jung spread himself too thin when he claimed to have the infallible ability to correctly interpret the dreams of anyone. No one taught Jung how to interpret dreams. Yet he claimed that at the age of 32 he interpreted 11 dreams a day 7 days a week for two years (CW3, par.557). Jungian literature (including his followers) is riddled with terms like the ordinary man, the layman, the common man, the non-specialist, etc. Only Jung and his followers can interpret dreams. Yah, right.
@Darrell861 Well, I'd agree he was not infallible and not inherently superior to anyone else. Nor did he have a complete understanding of the mind, who does?
He might of developed some abilities of analysis though, considering that was of great interest to him and put a lot of time and effort into that. So I would say he probably could analyse dreams better than untrained people.
@lordandy8 No one taught Jung how to interpret dreams. He was not trained. One does not gradually practice interpreting dreams. Interpretations either match the meaning or they don't. There is no such thing as an average or okay interpretation. It is logistically impossible to meet 11 people a day for two years, much less correctly interpret their dreams on the spot. Jung was lying about his claim. Jung was an elitist who fooled people into believing he could interpret dreams.
@Darrell861 i think i speak for everyone on these forums when i say, shut the hell up already. you dont make any sense. you have bad associations which confuse people from responding. your information is patchy and your words sound the same as a schizophrenics. why are you arguing with us when we didnt even create these theories? defeats the purpose...dont you think?
@freudian456 “I have made it a rule to remind myself that I can never understand somebody else’s dream well enough to interpret it correctly.” –Man and His Symbols, 1961 “At that time [1907] I analyzed at least four thousand dreams a year.”–Collected Works volume 3, par. 557, 1957 Jung lies in1957, then contradicts himself in 1961.
@freudian456 “Man And His Symbols” contains the term “Man” which is all-inclusive. It refers to all humans, female and male, all cultures, all religions, and everyone who has ever lived. Yet the index makes no mention of Islam, which comprises a lot of people. For the most part Islam bans idolatry, graven images and symbols. There is nothing for Jung and his followers to get their grubby mitts on and make mean what they want them to mean.
th thththtthththhth ththth basis ofofofofofoffo thteehehthththee lol.....it'd be funny if they just said 'um' like we do now days when we have nothing to say. this fool like won't give it up! like,' i'm gonna get the other syllable damn it!!' lol....sorry if i offended anyone in a super sour mood.
Carl Jung has been writing many interesting things.I like his ways of describing the person as consisting of many layers,the persona(the mask),anima ,animus,the shadow part,the hero and the self. I think the ideas about the self is most fascinating.I really like what i have read with this person.
If you want to listen to some good and deep electronic music you can check my channel and have a listen if you feel like it,it`s quality music,carefully selected.
you two really need to get off eachothers dicks. ive read you guys make post after post dogging eachother talking about creating secret accounts and knowing who the other really is and addmitting to following eachother around. NOT RELEVENT. neither are your stupid NWO theories. The truth is out there. you have no comprehension of it. your on youtube, not NPR. momos
the new world order has NOT finished stealing everyone's money just yet, the economy is going to get ALOT worse than this! The ONLY true answer lays at the foot of the one and ONLY king of kings, Jesus Christ! The one and only God! We the people of this Earth need to humble ourselves before the one and only king of kings and repent of our sins. NO man or woman on earth is a God, but the God of Abraham Issac and Jacob. Get ready people the man of sin is about to usher in the Agrarian age, NWO!
He was so popular in my youth. And yet his psychotherapy, like that of the others analysts also, cured precious few. And they had the convenient escape by blaming the repression of their poor patients. It was all a Fraud basically. It attempted to reconcile people with their infidelities (more than merely the sexual ones) in life. He was led by spirit-guides, like all true occultists.
So it is very likely he is outlining an understanding of life after death, though this has no place for physical beings with mapped out interpretations. And in no relation to this physical realm does Phi behold the key... It is conclusive of the Psi & Pi in practice of the unexplainable conscious/subconscious mind caught in a limbo of all time past/present/future, all in a blink of an eye. Our physical beings have slowed it all down & put a nice picture frame around it.
He cant seem to put his words to work for him, to extrapolate past events in time, is no more than humans repeating themselves. I wonder if he would put it so simple if he was actually dreaming the future?? It is more likely that those who dream the future are actually the only ones manifesting reality. But i dont believe that is what he was saying. But what he has failed to measure is the greek equations Psi/Pi/Phi which in physical parameters still stands the test of time/space
so what is he saying? that humans can extrapolate future probabilities based on past and current events? what is so profound about this? shouldn't that be a basic skill of all homo-sapiens. sapience should be in our nature after all, what is the big "mystery" behind alchemy. it seems to be no big deal - just a matter of practice and it should be taught to all children from an early age and encouraged to develop in adulthood? but society chooses to waste human potential - a crime.
@aaugoaa actually, technically NOTHING ever repeats its self, it might seem like similar circumstances, but things are always vastly different, almost beyond comprhension. What I think you are refering to is a changing pattern of behavior, by a changing species, in a changing enviroment, on a changing planet, in a changing solar system, in a changing universe, so technically, you just made one of the most incorrect statements imaginable. Change is universally abundant.
@aaugoaa no offence, but you are one of the most stupid individuals I have ever met, almost everything you say is wrong. Oh, and since you love the ancient egyptions, heres the facts. They were primitive compared to us, they sacrificed animals and humans to the "gods". In fact, they are as primitive to us, as neanderthals would be to them. You like to fantasize of this magical peaceful people, you watch to many movies, they were brutal, slave owning muderous, superstitious primitive people.
@JesusEndTimes your primitive you are that primitive you follow women around
you tube your real account was aARIESsSs you closed it and have made at least 5 different accounts to follow me around, you are in need of psychotic help...either that or you are so afraid that what i say is truth, so which one is it...are you afraid or just a nut?
@aaugoaa what you say is truth? the opposite actually, and what gets me is you think everything that is false to be true. And then to attack, harass and bully those who call you out? its called karma. And no, I create accounts and watch videos like I always did, I occassionaly check up on your wack job channel and clean up your intellectual mess so you can see how wrong you are first hand. Karma's a bitch, a very just bitch.
@JesusEndTimes it doesn't bother me that you think what i say is false, i don't give a shit what you think, so why do you what i think, to the point that you stalk me with different accounts around you tube?
@aaugoaa so the egypt you fantasize about, just like the God that visited you... is a product of your imagination, and lack of intelligence to differentiate between fantasy and realty, and do not exist. You would not wan't to live there, in fact I would give you a week before you would beg to be back in 2010, and you would also not wan't the human made character known as YHWH or God to be real, he would be as evil, murderous and primitive as the people who imagined this monster. Grow up.
All infants who are born , they see the awareness of things smell , touch, faces which they see every day like the mother or father ,. the infants mind start to develope as they are growing up at the same time as there 6 sence develope not 5 but 6, babies could see things which teenager or adult can't see. Here another example Identical twins who could think and read mind at the same time and develope 6 sense to see the future. Which it as been proven alot of times with the gov'tmnt.
some people loose lack of intrest developing there mind, but C.G Jung trying to say and other terms All human are born with 6 sence may be develope if you practice by visualizing.
I'm as a scientist and alchemist , it shows C.G Jung have raise few eyebrows to those who understand the knowlegde from past and present and to the future, He's also explain about the stereotypes of psychetype of all human being.
Capitalism is the wage slavery of immense humanity in a politically manipulated MARKET SYSTEM of artificial scarcity and manipulation to perpetuate the conditions of servitude and exploitation of the working people in the interest of the owning/ruling elite. Capitalism is historically outdated,dangerous destructive ,dehumanising and devaluing all and everything in its insatiable,nomadic rampaging of profit . Capitalism is evil
has anyone seen the video on this website Sacraments of Gnostic Church 1 its a lecture froom the gnostic teachings website and is preety informative on spiritual matters
I would agree with what KNOW stated. It is pertinent we become more aware on a societal level of ourselves, our relationship to each other, to the world, and to our collective past. Or WE WILL suffer the conditions of our ancestors. Why? Because where human. Our minds still work the same, even if the content in them has changed.
Of course there is always the potential for accumulated knowledge to affect how we wire ourselves and mesh our archetypes, there for the potential for novelty also increases with time.
The dependent factor here is the awareness of our history. If we are not aware of ourselves relative to our past, then we will be bound to repeat it.
This is to say, that by observing what archetypes were present in the composition of our past societies, and how they have interplayed in the past to create the events of our history, we can then look forward with that 'historical template' if you would, and observe what archetypes are now present, or what new faces have filled the old archetypal frames, and we will have a rather accurate predictor of how those forces will interact in pattern yet again.
Jung found that alchemy was a symbolic process for what the alchemist was trying to undergo in his psyche. That's all, it is not a magic or metaphysics.
I don't get what he's saying..or what you say sblackh..sorry i gotta keep working on my algebra and my tensor calculus. I can't be wasting anymore time with this.
how can we measure meta-physical phenomena? I agree he might be trying to understand quantum physics by means of meta-physical interations but he wasted his time trying this approach, instead he should've worked on the math like planck, eintein and schrodinger did. I dont get why people keep evading the math ...i guess because it's hard and they dont want to deal with it..instead they take the "fantasy" meta-physical road. it's sad.
@edgaritoaqui what about his theory on random sampling in the sub-conscious mind. how ppl r able to predict the future..etc.
of course it can't be proven, but perhaps if we start disecting people with psi ability and slice them up in thin wittle pieces like Einstein's brain we can start research!
@edgaritoaqui i don't get why people keep evading what they can't easily understand, i guess because it's hard and they don't want to deal with it... instead they take " math formulas" cientific road , it's sad.
@leenaguer Just prove any philosopher's point....just have some credible proof that what he/she is saying makes sense....its all it takes to make us scientists happy. I am not saying Jung is wrong I am saying is that he should support his arguments or philosophy with measurable and precise experiments.
@paerarru agree. And @edgaritoaqui, "we scientists" often form theories before we have empirical evidence to actually prove them. This does not make them invalid or wrong, we then set out to try and prove them. But we often fail. And then the theory is refined or even completely changed. The inquiring mind is at the heart of science, not reductionism to numbers (which at the end of the day are also symbols.) (tbc)
@paerarru and @edgaritoaqui As scientist you may be interested in learning more about the process of "logic" in its purest sense to help add some weight to your arguments. I understand the need to be aware of charlatans, zealots and those who would have us give up all our critical faculties, so I support your cause for rational thinking. But we also must not throw the baby out with the bath water. There are many great minds who have much to teach us beyond the strict sciences and mathematics.
@edgaritoaqui - as scientist who has stumbled across Jung, you might want to check out "Symphony of Science - We are all Connected" here on you-tube. Hope you enjoy it. I do! :-)
@leenaguer - not only that, they wholly ignore that number / quantity & processes (formula, functions) are just shorthands to express how the universe works, and that in many other cultures they've always been known to come entirely from god. personally, i think they take the soul out of it because they don't want to be reminded that they have used it to build hell, instead of heaven on earth.
Jung is both a scientist and a meta-physician. He understood, intuitively, the world explained by quantum physics: that is, that the material world, appears in time and space, but that it is created by consciousness and intention.
When speaking of alchemy, he is not talking of chemical interactions, but of the meta-physical transmutation of base elements into gold - that is raising vibration and awareness.
I emphasize my surprise because by Jung's time chemistry was already a scientic discipline...and he stills talking about alchemy! thats y im surprise.
im supprise he's talking about alchemy as it was valid and scientific...there is no alchemy people,....chemistry is the real scientific truth that explains all molecular phenomena...Carl Jung is a great philosopher but not a scientist.
And you know this because you've studied alchemy? No?
Alchemy came before chemistry. Your "real scientific truth" had its roots in alchemy. I wonder why they would base a scientific discipline on something that (according to you) doesn't exist.
we all learn this in our first semester of chemistry...how people tried to convert metal to gold...even Newton worked with metals like that, im not saying alchemy never existed im simply saying that now a days alchemy has no scientific value..thats all.
Didn't mean to jump on you like that. Alchemy was used to create medicines from herbs and minerals (and animals I suppose). The purpose is to purify the substance being worked with. It is about much more than turning lead into gold. It is about refining all kinds of things, and that includes the practitioner. Chemistry is completely mechanistic. Alchemy is Chemistry with spirit. At least that's my take on it.
in a mystirious way and one of my highlighting points in my life was that i started traveling through India and that several months later i arrived in the little CGJ castle of Bollingen..
"I remember all my life Raining down as cold as ice A shadow of a man A face through a window Crying in the night The night goes into Morning, just another day Happy people pass my way Looking in their eyes I see a memory I never realized you made me so happy, oh Mandy " Now then ....substitute the name "Philemon" for "Mandy" and VOILA ! You know that I'm right.
Yes. It's quite wonderful isn't it? He had his own personal little demon. That's great. And he's heralded and lionized by dupes as having been some sort of visionary in the business of what's actually the business of producing great quantities of gibberish.
when i hear about the future i always think off that sponge bob episode where the flying dutch man gives them three wishes and then patrick wastes a wish saying he wish he knew that earlier.
i dont know why but i do!
justletuslive 3 weeks ago
you have some great stuff here
staranjela 1 month ago
Nice Work
RomanPeriphas 3 months ago
Psychohistory
tomb613 4 months ago
I guess i'm the only one that couldn't understand one word this man said.
qqqTOXICqqq 5 months ago
@qqqTOXICqqq that is because you believe in Freud and you are in the annal state, probably you are gay :)
QuantumProphet 5 months ago
@QuantumProphet Not at all. I really couldn't understand because of the audio. I found other clips on the tube, this guy C. G. Jung & this guy is awesome!
qqqTOXICqqq 5 months ago
@qqqTOXICqqq LOL. the anal state was pun intended, no offense tried :) Peace bro
QuantumProphet 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@QuantumProphet какие "факты нло" обнаружили здешние комменторы - не понимаю. все кадры - фэйк. показания бёрда - засекречены. всё, что я тут реально увидел - недоработанный аппарат на воздушной подушке, который не может даже подняться над землёй выше, чем на полметра. "вынырнуть из-под воды" возле антарктиды такое г..вно точно не смогло бы. брэхняаа.
RAREpicture 2 weeks ago
@QuantumProphet You are an ass!
DrEdFeraco 1 week ago
@qqqTOXICqqq lol i feel you
MrMexican1333 5 months ago
I thank Carl Jung for hooking psychology up with spirituality/alchemy/strange archetype ideas. Too bad psychologists today don't dabble in the supplimental spiritual aspect of his design!! haha
RindsANDPeels2 6 months ago
The title is somewhat misleading. Jung is not suggesting that Alchemy can magically predict the future, but that understanding alchemy as a cultural and historical phenomenon with certain psychologically significant elements (which Jung refers to as "Archetypes") we can better explain and therefore predict future modes of human behavior.
Elwood12CWR 6 months ago
Okay can somebody dumb this down for me please? I would really appreciate it
FreshNorman 6 months ago
@FreshNorman Archtypes- grouping people to classes; similiar habits and then predict what they will do if they have more resources,etc in the future. I common example is setting the earth up with only 100 people on it using the set to represent 7 billion people.
b29349 6 months ago
Carl Jung = woo woo (spiritualist drivel)...
alifeofreason 7 months ago
JA! YO HE DORMIDO EN ESA CASA!
ThePoltergueist 8 months ago
lØl_i_fëÉl_só_løNËly_tõdaY
BabiaaJacquiia426 11 months ago
YES
TacticalToast619 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What do you get when you cross David Bohm's "Implicate Order" concept with Roger Penrose's quantum consciousness model, Orch-OR?
Penrose + Bohm = Jung: watch?v=qAjC81MUe_I
JohananRaatz 1 year ago
Comment removed
ThePoltergueist 1 year ago
Comment removed
Howsonify 1 year ago
It's quite possible that I have a misunderstanding to the regarded subject, but it seems absurd to hold a position that states that human nature, or "pyschological functions" are dependent upon color. If this proposition is true, then we must admit that blind people, who see no color (except for blackness, which isn't included), are deficient of cognitive and pyschological functions. But this conclusion is absurd: many blind people are highly capable of all the listed "pyschological functions."
Howsonify 1 year ago
@Howsonify
Do blind people dream?
ANDROID697 1 year ago
@ANDROID697 Of course they do. It's not a question whether the blind dream or not, its what is it they dream about. Color is only understood through the senses (i.e sight). Sure, they can say the word "red," but the word is meaningless to them. This brings us back to my argument: If "pyschological functions" are dependent upon the "pyscological primary colors," then the blind, who neither see nor understand color, have no "psychological functions." But isn't this conclusion completely absurd?
Howsonify 1 year ago
@Howsonify I think the color red is red, the word red is meaningless its just used to describe and organize what we experience from sight. It is impossible to know whether a blind person has the color red in his mind when he talks of the color red. He might be thinking of blue, purple, orange, yellow.....mentally any one can picture the color red but if you want to associate it with something physical or sensible then that takes something experienceable by sight.
freudian456 1 year ago
Comment removed
Howsonify 1 year ago
Comment removed
Howsonify 1 year ago
@freudian456 I pretty much agree with everything your saying, but let's be clear about this. Consider a 100% blind man, who has been so his whole life. We know that color is only understood by experiencing it through sight. Moreover, colors cannot be compared, associated, described or reasoned about without this form of experience: sight. How, then, could this man even speak of color as we, the not blind, do? He can't. Read Aristotle's posts then my posts to see why were speaking of colors.
Howsonify 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Howsonify 'We know that color is only understood by experiencing it through sight.'
Yes but color exists for a blind man as much as for a person with full sight.(mentally speaking)
'Moreover, colors cannot be compared, associated, described or reasoned about without this form of experience: sight'
Exactly, it is the 'association' to something that separates the 100% blind man from the man who has sight.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@Howsonify 'How, then, could this man even speak of color as we, the not blind, do?'
Your right, he cant. However this doesn't mean that he can not have a mental 'picture' of the color red. Our experience of the color red by sight is only good for organization purposes and attributions made to our environment. You couldn't prove whether a blind person is talking of red, just like you cant prove whether a normal person has any thought in his mind's eye, hitherto.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
"you're so crazy" represents what american media usually label celebrities as, when these smart, creative people are used by same industry try to exploit to push american consumerism and materialism. These people were made a star, like Lucifer, the Morning Star, and I'm not even religious, I believe religion is man-made but the presence of a greater entity, good and evil, is definitely present.
ggnub100 1 year ago
the sound is so bad...
HADITANARI 1 year ago
"I was always looking for some inbetween. You know, something that links the remote past with the present moment." I don't care how many books this man has written, or how important he may be to modern psychology, anyone who practices the scientific method and then turns around and makes an overt historicist claim is out of their mind and should be also out of a job.
Howsonify 1 year ago
@Howsonify Yes, Jung was out of his mind. Yet he was also a skillfull guru who had many people fooled. Give the guy credit for that. His historic claims are based on inductive logic. He decided which symbols he chose and then made them mean what he wanted them to mean.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Lol!
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Perhaps you're right. Jung does deserves credit for his wild imagination, the kind of imagination that would make even Peter Pan jealous. I've always wondered why Allen Bloom-the American, platonist philosopher- called pyschology 'morally bankrupt and inept of true knowledge.' I now think he had Jung in mind when he said that satement. I, however, like the scientifically supported pyschology, but not psychology supported by one's imagination, mysticism and metaphysical perspectives.
Howsonify 1 year ago
@Howsonify Speaking of Plato, Jung presented archetypes as if they existed in a platonic realm in and of themselves. His theory of archetypes has no practical application. It is a form of mysticism. But he is quite entertaining in the way he and his followers find ways of putting their foot in their mouth.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 There is no form of mysticism. What sort of issue do you have with archetypes, is it a mind-matter issue? Seriously? You are the only person with his foot in his mouth, you haven't brought up anything convincing, no argument worth considering.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle “I have made it a rule to remind myself that I can never understand somebody else’s dream well enough to interpret it correctly.” –Carl Jung, Man And His Symbols, p. 42, 1959
“At that time [1907] I analyzed at least four thousand dreams a year.”–Carl Jung, Collected Works, vol. 3, par. 557, 1957. These are examples of Jung putting his foot in his mouth.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 'I have made it a rule to remind myself that I can never understand somebody else’s dream well enough to interpret it correctly'
Also on pg 42 Man and His Symbols states, ''it is obvious if you assume(the dreamer) that the dream is symbolic, you will interpret it differently from somebody else that the essential energizing thought or emotion is KNOWN already and "disguised" by the dream. In the latter case, dream interpretation little sense, for you find what you already know.''
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle That's like saying there are multiple ways of analyzing blood samples for DNA. The technician can match a sample with anyone he wants. Also, at least 4000 dreams a year comes out to at least 8000 dreams over two years. That's 11 dreamsa day, 7 days a week for 730 consecutive days. Not only is Jung lying, but he's operating on the faulty premise that all dreams have meaning in the first place. No one taught Jung how to interpret dreams.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 'That's 11 dreamsa day, 7 days a week for 730 consecutive days.'
This is presumptuous.
'Not only is Jung lying, but he's operating on the faulty premise that all dreams have meaning in the first place. No one taught Jung how to interpret dreams. '
?? Look up online, dream dictionary, you can have your dreams interpreted for free and no interpreter needed, yet its the same thing as an interpreter doing it for you. No one is lying.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
Comment removed
Darrell861 1 year ago
Comment removed
Darrell861 1 year ago
@07Aristotle Mary Ann Mattoon wrote that it takes a minimum of two one-hour sessions for the analyst to interpret just one dream (Understanding Dreams, p.10). Reductio ad absurdum, Jung spent 22 hours a day, 7 days a week for two years doing nothing but interpreting dreams. This leaves him two hours a day to eat, sleep, work on word association tests, and trim his fingernails.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@07Aristotle There was no internet in 1907. It is logistically impossible just to meet 11 new people a day, much less have them come prepared with a dream text. Jung was a confidence trickster. Like Jim Jones, he tested the gullibility of his followers to see how outrageous a lie he could tell without being challenged
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 What I was implying, by the dream dictionary, was that it does not need to take 2hrs to interpret your dream, you can do it yourself , no interpreter required. I don't know where mattoon got such a statistic but it is a fact that it does not take 2hrs to interpret a dream. It does not matter whether someone is interpreting or your doing the interpreting the dream. The dream content does not magically change when the client hands over the material to the therapist.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle The only person who has the ability to interpret dreams is the person who experienced the dream. Yet a pervading theme inJungian literature isthat one must not interpret their own dreams. As of 1978 Mattoon was regarded as the foremost expert on everything Jungever said about dreams. As for the two hours, she made it up off the top of her head, like practically all of Jungian literature on dreams.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 'The only person who has the ability to interpret dreams is the person who experienced the dream.'
Right, yet I can get a dream dictionary online and do it myself. It does not matter if a therapist is there or not the interpretation is the same either way.
'As for the two hours, she made it up off the top of her head'
I knew it, it was definitely made of the top of someones head.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@Darrell861 There is no benefit in tricking when you can do the interpretation yourself. Last time I checked therapists don't offer dream interpretations as a service, because it can be done in a short amount of time. In 1907 he began his correspondence with Freud and submitted an article to him on the topic of dementia. Indeed, I would be gullible in believing your short-sighted confabulations which have no substance.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle Jung said that dream interpretation is always a dialectical process between two people. Marie-Louise von Franz said that it's not a good idea to interpret your own dreams. Daryl Sharp said that if you think you've understood the meaning of a dream immediately upon waking chances are you're mistaken. James Hall said that Jungians are particularly strong at interpreting dreams. This all amounts to Jungian elitism.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Fact is is that I can go online and use the dream dictionary to interpret my dreams, without interpreting them from just what I know. I can use the dream dictionary to interpret my dreams, no therapist required. According to Jung, active imagination is "a dialectical procedure, a dialogue between yourself and the unconscious figures" and not dream interpretation.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle Unconscious figures are not people. Von Franz, Sharp and Hall were not talking of unconscious figures.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@07Aristotle Dream dictionaries are nothing more than forms of entertainment. On p.134-136 of Memories Dreams Reflections Jung took dream interpretation so seriously that he made it a requirement that one must submit a dream sample to him. It was a prerequisite for becoming an analyst. The case study here did not involve an unconscious figure. It involves a person.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Unconscious figures are unconscious figures. Von Franz, Sharp and Hall were not talking of unconscious figures. The dream dictionary is not a form of entertainment but a tool used for dream interpretation. Unconscious figures are in active imagination and not in therapy.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle In 1900 Gustav Hindman Miller published "The Dictionary of Dreams: 10,000 dreams Interpreted. Today the book is obsolete. It makes no mention of dreams aout cars, airplanes and computers.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 The Dictionary of Dreams: 10,000 dreams Interpreted by Gustave Miller is based on religion rather than psychology, with attention paid to The Bible and the role dreams played throughout. Dream psychology is mainstream, and religious dream interpretation is on the fringe, this book's title is misrepresentative.
'It makes no mention of dreams aout cars, airplanes and computers.'
It is impossible to JUST dream about cars, airplanes and computers.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Active imagination did not require another person. Dream Interpretation did not require another person, though it does not matter, the interpretation is still the same.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle Authors of dream dictionaries can use active imagination to make up entries off the top of their heads.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Active imagination does not entail something of the top of someones head.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle Jung and Jolande Jacobi were talkingofff thet op of their heads they said that the color red in dreams represnts the feeling function. There are four dominant functions, yet only three primary collors.Feeling has red and blue has thinking. That leaves sensation and intuition to fight over yellow. .
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 No, there is four; blue, red, yellow and green. Jung postulated four basic psychological functions: thinking, feeling, intuition, and sensation. These are the four ways in which each individual orients himself to his experience. While every individual carries the potential for all four modes, one mode is used more habitually than the others, and the individual may be said to be a type: a
“thinking type,” “feeling type,” “sensation type,” or “intuitive type.”
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@Darrell861 This correlation closely based on simple logic between the four functions of consciousness and the four psychological primary colors: red, blue, green, and yellow. Red= Feeling, Blue=Thinking, Green=Sensation, Yellow=Intuition. This is based of his personality typology. There is no fighting over yellow.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle So if some guy dreams about the red car his dad drove when he was a kid, then he is dreaming about the feeling function (?) Green is not a primary color. It is a blend of yellow and blue. Assigning a color to thef our dominant. functions is window dressing which has no meaning.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@07Aristotle Jacobi's contribution to Man And His Symbols is a lengthy nine month analysis of a client she calls Henry. It is unethical to diclose intimate facts about a client. There is no indication that Henry gave his permission for this disclusure. In one of the dreams Henry dreams he wants to climb the Zinalrothorn. Jacobi draws attention to the central syllable "rot." and says that since it translates into red then the mountain represents the feeling function.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 'It is unethical to diclose intimate facts about a client. There is no indication that Henry gave his permission for this disclusure'
Again, this is an assumption. How are you certain they did not omit it?
" The word rot ("red) in zinalrothorn touches on Henry's emotional problem. Red is usually symbolic for feeling or passion; here it points to the feeling function, which was insufficiently developed in Henry'' Pg 331-334
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@Darrell861 'So if some guy dreams about the red car his dad drove when he was a kid, then he is dreaming about the feeling function (?) '
Yep, this is a psychological fact.
'Green is not a primary color. It is a blend of yellow and blue. Assigning a color to thef our dominant. functions is window dressing which has no meaning.'
Its based on Primary Color OF PERSONALITY, based on Jung's personality typology. Blue, Red, Yellow, and Green. It has meaning. Read more.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
Comment removed
Darrell861 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Darrell861 Mary Ann Mattoon wrote that it takes a minimum of two one-hour sessions for the analyst to interpret just one dream (Understanding Dreams, p.10). Reductio ad absurdum, Jung spent 22 hours a day, 7 days a week for two years doing nothing but interpreting dreams. This leaves him two hours a day to eat, sleep, work on word association tests, and trim his fingernails.
Darrell861 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Darrell861 Mary Ann Mattoon wrote that it takes a minimum of two one-hour sessions for the analyst to interpret just one dream (Understanding Dreams, p.10). Reductio ad absurdum, Jung spent 22 hours a day, 7 days a week for two years doing nothing but interpreting dreams. This leaves him two hours a day to eat, sleep, work on word association tests, and trim his fingernails.
Darrell861 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Darrell861 'At that time [1907] I analyzed at least four thousand dreams a year.'
??? Look up Dream Dictionary online, you can have your dream interpreted WITHOUT an interpreter, for only a few seconds.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@Howsonify 'Jung does deserves credit for his wild imagination, the kind of imagination that would make even Peter Pan jealous'
''Active Imagination'', you mean.
'Allen Bloom-the American, platonist philosopher- called pyschology 'morally bankrupt and inept of true knowledge.' I now think he had Jung in mind when he said that satement'
According to The Closing of the American Mind by Allan Bloom Pg. 136-7 he was criticizing Freud because be proposed the sexual instinct as man's main drive
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle Perhaps "Active Imigination" is the better word here, but looking at its meaning, the term denotes far more then what I intended when I had said that.
Yes, it was from Bloom's "The Closing of the American Mind" that I was paraphrasing from memory. But it wasn't from those pages (look at page 121). Looking back now over the material, my words "morally bankrupt" and "inept of true knowledge" were a bit stronger than Bloom would have used. As for Jung's connection, it was a joke.
Howsonify 1 year ago
@Howsonify ,he thought that Freud promoted 'psychology without the psyche', which was not concerned with the 'real self'. He believed that 'Freud did not give a satisfying account of all the things that we experienced'. He was not thinking about Jung, but Freud. He believed we needed more of the soul in psychology.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@Howsonify its a good thing that it was an introspective statement, you have nothing to worry about.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
I believe the archetypes to be properties of fundamental forces, I do think it's possible that they may change therefore.
Imbude74 1 year ago
@Imbude74 If archetypes are not innate, then they can be invented. The question becomes, just what is the upper limit. Or, the Hero Archetype can change into The Inner Gourmet archetype. Or the Inner Cat Lover.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Jung had a strong imagination but he was limited by the technology and knowledge of his time and perhaps also limited by certain beliefs he had, so his mind had nothing it could do but imagine.
NebunLaCap 1 year ago
@NebunLaCap If Jung was limited by the technology and knowledge of his time and perhaps by certain beliefs, then he couldn't have the ability to interpret dreams. For that, he used his strong imagination. He made dreams mean what he wanted them to mean.
Darrell861 1 year ago
Very interesting what C.J. says about archetypes .... I have been a member of ManKind Project for 5 years now, and unknowingly, was exposed to Alchemy principles ..... we strive to live in the present, thus putting our past in the past, thus allowing the possibility of looking to the future, our future, and creating a more fulfilling life, realizing our true potential, as opposed to being consumed with the fear of death and not contributing to this world.
reevox 1 year ago
@reevox In his 1990 book "Homcoming: Reclaiming And Championing Your Inner Child" John Bradshaw said, "I believe the inner wounded child has become a modern archetype." A recent edition of the New Orleans C.G. Jung Society Newsletter spoke of "the archetype of the kiss." One TV commercial referred to the "Inner Gourmet" in all of us. If archetypes are innate, then these three apply to neolithic Man. If not, they are invented ad hoc by anyone wanting to sell something.
Darrell861 1 year ago
turning sound into light, thank you grndmstrvwr!!!
verypleased 1 year ago
Fortune tellers can use palmistry or astrology or Tarot to predict the future. Fine. But dream interpretation and alchemy to predict the future in the practice of psychiatry? Huh? Dream interpretation has been going on for thousands of years, yet it has no underlying structure. All dream interpreters (including Jung) have been and are self-proclaimed.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 See Reader's Digest article "Dare to Dream"
NebunLaCap 1 year ago
@NebunLaCap There's nothing wrong with dreaming. It's a natural human function. Keeping a dream journal is a great expository writing excercise. No one is obligated to write their dreams down. But if one is under pressure from a psychiatrist to write their dreams down, that pressure might affect the content of the dream. No one taught Jung how to interpret dreams, yet he convinced himself and his followers that he did have that ability. That claim is fraudulent.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 You can interpret them though and what they might but everyone will probably have the same meaning dreams at one point or another. For example, your in a fight and you can't swing. It may mean you have recently been in a position where you felt you had no control, and your mind is going through memory reconsolidation, or perhaps your mind is just going through its routine desensitization so you don't show weakness when you find yourself in a position where you lack control you want
NebunLaCap 1 year ago
@NebunLaCap Jung made dreams mean what he wanted them to mean. A DNA expert does not testify in court by saying, "Maybe, perhaps, uhh..sometimes... for example..." You just made up your interpretations off the top of your head of hypothetical dreams of fictional people you have never met. You are arguing the same way as Jung. You have demonstrated my point. Once again, no on ever taught Jung how to interpret dreams.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Arguing? LOL how can you argue with the same beliefs? I was supporting what you where saying about Jung. His shit was fantasy. I only said it MAY mean because there may be different reasons your brain is doing that but you are still reconsolidating memory.
NebunLaCap 1 year ago
@NebunLaCap Wait. We agree? Sorry. I'm so used to meeting Jungians on this site.
Darrell861 1 year ago
「そこでわたしはこの遠く離れた過去を現在のこの瞬間に結びつけるような媒体を、常に探し続けました。
驚いたことに、わたしは、それが化学の歴史として理解されている錬金術（Alchemy）であることに気づきました。
（略）
そ れは現在われわれが物事を理解する上での方法の基礎なのです。したがって、それは意識閾下にある本来の秩序のようなものなのです。われわれが元型をより広 い観点からながめたときこそ、元型の展開や元型の活動の様相は、そのようにすばらしく見えることになります。おそらく今日以降、聴衆者諸君は過去の中へと 振り返ってながめてみれば、いかにして現在の瞬間が過去から展開してきたかに気づくことでしょう。
（略）
錬金術の考え方がどのように中世の意識に働きかけたかの例を通して、まさにそれと同じように、無意識がわれわれ自身にはたらきかけているのがおわかりでしょう。」（『無意識の探求』62頁〜64頁）
67slowslow 1 year ago
It's okay if someone talks about predicting the future and also claims to have the ability to interpret dreams. It's okay if someone wants to be a guru and have others follow him and not question him. But if the same person wants to become a psychiatrist/psychotherapist... NOT OKAY. The client can become intimidated, and allow the therapist to manipulate him. Jung spread himself too thin.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Too thin? I wonder. Jung spent a great number of years, untold hours, sorting out his thoughts and making his connections. We don't have to agree with those conclusions, but certainly we can be aroused by his way of seeing.
PoliticalPars 1 year ago
@PoliticalPars Yes, too thin. If one wants to be a psychotherapist he should focus on his profession. Dream interpretaion, predicting the future, as well as other forms of divination have no place in such a licensed profession. Jung claimed to be an expert on everything he put his hands on: divination, paranormal phenomena, the battle between Good and Evil, comparative religion, psychological types and so on. In that respect Dr. Phil does the same. Both do so at the exppense of ethics.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Fatter than most people achieve.....probably even most psychotherapists. The mind is not an isolated object, it is connected and conditioned by the world. An understanding of the world will aid psychotherapy just as vice versa would be true.
lordandy8 1 year ago
@lordandy8 Jung spread himself too thin when he claimed to have the infallible ability to correctly interpret the dreams of anyone. No one taught Jung how to interpret dreams. Yet he claimed that at the age of 32 he interpreted 11 dreams a day 7 days a week for two years (CW3, par.557). Jungian literature (including his followers) is riddled with terms like the ordinary man, the layman, the common man, the non-specialist, etc. Only Jung and his followers can interpret dreams. Yah, right.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Well, I'd agree he was not infallible and not inherently superior to anyone else. Nor did he have a complete understanding of the mind, who does?
He might of developed some abilities of analysis though, considering that was of great interest to him and put a lot of time and effort into that. So I would say he probably could analyse dreams better than untrained people.
lordandy8 1 year ago
@lordandy8 No one taught Jung how to interpret dreams. He was not trained. One does not gradually practice interpreting dreams. Interpretations either match the meaning or they don't. There is no such thing as an average or okay interpretation. It is logistically impossible to meet 11 people a day for two years, much less correctly interpret their dreams on the spot. Jung was lying about his claim. Jung was an elitist who fooled people into believing he could interpret dreams.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 i think i speak for everyone on these forums when i say, shut the hell up already. you dont make any sense. you have bad associations which confuse people from responding. your information is patchy and your words sound the same as a schizophrenics. why are you arguing with us when we didnt even create these theories? defeats the purpose...dont you think?
freudian456 1 year ago
@freudian456 “I have made it a rule to remind myself that I can never understand somebody else’s dream well enough to interpret it correctly.” –Man and His Symbols, 1961 “At that time [1907] I analyzed at least four thousand dreams a year.”–Collected Works volume 3, par. 557, 1957 Jung lies in1957, then contradicts himself in 1961.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 my point exactly. GET A LIFE!
freudian456 1 year ago
@freudian456 “Man And His Symbols” contains the term “Man” which is all-inclusive. It refers to all humans, female and male, all cultures, all religions, and everyone who has ever lived. Yet the index makes no mention of Islam, which comprises a lot of people. For the most part Islam bans idolatry, graven images and symbols. There is nothing for Jung and his followers to get their grubby mitts on and make mean what they want them to mean.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 GET A LIFE.
freudian456 1 year ago
the people that don't understand the information hurt other people
KALEIDOSCOPEN 1 year ago
th thththtthththhth ththth basis ofofofofofoffo thteehehthththee lol.....it'd be funny if they just said 'um' like we do now days when we have nothing to say. this fool like won't give it up! like,' i'm gonna get the other syllable damn it!!' lol....sorry if i offended anyone in a super sour mood.
cropatia 1 year ago
Carl Jung has been writing many interesting things.I like his ways of describing the person as consisting of many layers,the persona(the mask),anima ,animus,the shadow part,the hero and the self. I think the ideas about the self is most fascinating.I really like what i have read with this person.
If you want to listen to some good and deep electronic music you can check my channel and have a listen if you feel like it,it`s quality music,carefully selected.
Have a really great day : )
Gemendelos 1 year ago
you two really need to get off eachothers dicks. ive read you guys make post after post dogging eachother talking about creating secret accounts and knowing who the other really is and addmitting to following eachother around. NOT RELEVENT. neither are your stupid NWO theories. The truth is out there. you have no comprehension of it. your on youtube, not NPR. momos
Ldunathan 1 year ago
the new world order has NOT finished stealing everyone's money just yet, the economy is going to get ALOT worse than this! The ONLY true answer lays at the foot of the one and ONLY king of kings, Jesus Christ! The one and only God! We the people of this Earth need to humble ourselves before the one and only king of kings and repent of our sins. NO man or woman on earth is a God, but the God of Abraham Issac and Jacob. Get ready people the man of sin is about to usher in the Agrarian age, NWO!
esther19741974 1 year ago
@esther19741974 Agrarian age? Blood type A stands for Agrarian, y'know. If there is such an age we must surely already be in it.
natmanprime 1 year ago
picking up The Red Book today!
Redcaster916 1 year ago
ol jung struggled to speak in english..........genius in many ways tho
flyinghotwing 1 year ago
I expected a rick roll lol
MisteeeeerKennedy 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
He was so popular in my youth. And yet his psychotherapy, like that of the others analysts also, cured precious few. And they had the convenient escape by blaming the repression of their poor patients. It was all a Fraud basically. It attempted to reconcile people with their infidelities (more than merely the sexual ones) in life. He was led by spirit-guides, like all true occultists.
orbis2009 1 year ago
wtf is he saying ?
arizona13ay 1 year ago
@arizona13ay wtf happened to his Sun screen?
AClarke2007 1 year ago
So it is very likely he is outlining an understanding of life after death, though this has no place for physical beings with mapped out interpretations. And in no relation to this physical realm does Phi behold the key... It is conclusive of the Psi & Pi in practice of the unexplainable conscious/subconscious mind caught in a limbo of all time past/present/future, all in a blink of an eye. Our physical beings have slowed it all down & put a nice picture frame around it.
LendMeYourHand 1 year ago
He cant seem to put his words to work for him, to extrapolate past events in time, is no more than humans repeating themselves. I wonder if he would put it so simple if he was actually dreaming the future?? It is more likely that those who dream the future are actually the only ones manifesting reality. But i dont believe that is what he was saying. But what he has failed to measure is the greek equations Psi/Pi/Phi which in physical parameters still stands the test of time/space
LendMeYourHand 1 year ago
so what is he saying? that humans can extrapolate future probabilities based on past and current events? what is so profound about this? shouldn't that be a basic skill of all homo-sapiens. sapience should be in our nature after all, what is the big "mystery" behind alchemy. it seems to be no big deal - just a matter of practice and it should be taught to all children from an early age and encouraged to develop in adulthood? but society chooses to waste human potential - a crime.
MustNotRead 1 year ago
yes history repeats itself, you can predict the future by the past.
aaugoaa 1 year ago
@aaugoaa actually, technically NOTHING ever repeats its self, it might seem like similar circumstances, but things are always vastly different, almost beyond comprhension. What I think you are refering to is a changing pattern of behavior, by a changing species, in a changing enviroment, on a changing planet, in a changing solar system, in a changing universe, so technically, you just made one of the most incorrect statements imaginable. Change is universally abundant.
JesusEndTimes 1 year ago
@JesusEndTimes your an idiot...plain and simple idiot lol
your not even worth a decent reply from me.
aaugoaa 1 year ago
@aaugoaa no offence, but you are one of the most stupid individuals I have ever met, almost everything you say is wrong. Oh, and since you love the ancient egyptions, heres the facts. They were primitive compared to us, they sacrificed animals and humans to the "gods". In fact, they are as primitive to us, as neanderthals would be to them. You like to fantasize of this magical peaceful people, you watch to many movies, they were brutal, slave owning muderous, superstitious primitive people.
JesusEndTimes 1 year ago
@JesusEndTimes your primitive you are that primitive you follow women around
you tube your real account was aARIESsSs you closed it and have made at least 5 different accounts to follow me around, you are in need of psychotic help...either that or you are so afraid that what i say is truth, so which one is it...are you afraid or just a nut?
aaugoaa 1 year ago
@aaugoaa what you say is truth? the opposite actually, and what gets me is you think everything that is false to be true. And then to attack, harass and bully those who call you out? its called karma. And no, I create accounts and watch videos like I always did, I occassionaly check up on your wack job channel and clean up your intellectual mess so you can see how wrong you are first hand. Karma's a bitch, a very just bitch.
JesusEndTimes 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JesusEndTimes it doesn't bother me that you think what i say is false, i don't give a shit what you think, so why do you what i think, to the point that you stalk me with different accounts around you tube?
aaugoaa 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@aaugoaa
you are so dumb....
transtlantic 1 year ago
@aaugoaa so the egypt you fantasize about, just like the God that visited you... is a product of your imagination, and lack of intelligence to differentiate between fantasy and realty, and do not exist. You would not wan't to live there, in fact I would give you a week before you would beg to be back in 2010, and you would also not wan't the human made character known as YHWH or God to be real, he would be as evil, murderous and primitive as the people who imagined this monster. Grow up.
JesusEndTimes 1 year ago
All infants who are born , they see the awareness of things smell , touch, faces which they see every day like the mother or father ,. the infants mind start to develope as they are growing up at the same time as there 6 sence develope not 5 but 6, babies could see things which teenager or adult can't see. Here another example Identical twins who could think and read mind at the same time and develope 6 sense to see the future. Which it as been proven alot of times with the gov'tmnt.
Apolloangel11 1 year ago
some people loose lack of intrest developing there mind, but C.G Jung trying to say and other terms All human are born with 6 sence may be develope if you practice by visualizing.
Apolloangel11 1 year ago
I'm as a scientist and alchemist , it shows C.G Jung have raise few eyebrows to those who understand the knowlegde from past and present and to the future, He's also explain about the stereotypes of psychetype of all human being.
Apolloangel11 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Capitalism is the wage slavery of immense humanity in a politically manipulated MARKET SYSTEM of artificial scarcity and manipulation to perpetuate the conditions of servitude and exploitation of the working people in the interest of the owning/ruling elite. Capitalism is historically outdated,dangerous destructive ,dehumanising and devaluing all and everything in its insatiable,nomadic rampaging of profit . Capitalism is evil
arzoyan 1 year ago
has anyone seen the video on this website Sacraments of Gnostic Church 1 its a lecture froom the gnostic teachings website and is preety informative on spiritual matters
cheesyrichardhead 1 year ago
I would agree with what KNOW stated. It is pertinent we become more aware on a societal level of ourselves, our relationship to each other, to the world, and to our collective past. Or WE WILL suffer the conditions of our ancestors. Why? Because where human. Our minds still work the same, even if the content in them has changed.
whatoneknows 1 year ago
Of course there is always the potential for accumulated knowledge to affect how we wire ourselves and mesh our archetypes, there for the potential for novelty also increases with time.
The dependent factor here is the awareness of our history. If we are not aware of ourselves relative to our past, then we will be bound to repeat it.
whatoneknows 1 year ago
This is to say, that by observing what archetypes were present in the composition of our past societies, and how they have interplayed in the past to create the events of our history, we can then look forward with that 'historical template' if you would, and observe what archetypes are now present, or what new faces have filled the old archetypal frames, and we will have a rather accurate predictor of how those forces will interact in pattern yet again.
whatoneknows 1 year ago
shatomanya - well put! Jung is the greatest thinker of them all, and any popularization is ruining.
malenkov 1 year ago
PLEASE don't put Paulo Coelho in the same sentence as Carl Jung. That's All.
shatomanya 1 year ago 3
@shatomanya Agree.
bullmeecham 1 year ago
Jung found that alchemy was a symbolic process for what the alchemist was trying to undergo in his psyche. That's all, it is not a magic or metaphysics.
muntajabthegreat 1 year ago
Yes! Oh Dear Paulo Coelho, author of The Alchemist, and Carl Jung you are right!! Thank you for posting this video, very much appreciated : )
danceswithcrayons 1 year ago
I don't get what he's saying..or what you say sblackh..sorry i gotta keep working on my algebra and my tensor calculus. I can't be wasting anymore time with this.
edgaritoaqui 2 years ago
how can we measure meta-physical phenomena? I agree he might be trying to understand quantum physics by means of meta-physical interations but he wasted his time trying this approach, instead he should've worked on the math like planck, eintein and schrodinger did. I dont get why people keep evading the math ...i guess because it's hard and they dont want to deal with it..instead they take the "fantasy" meta-physical road. it's sad.
edgaritoaqui 2 years ago
if you read jung he explains why...
and why his approach is not "fantasy" and why you call it "fantasy".
wblackh 2 years ago 3
@edgaritoaqui what about his theory on random sampling in the sub-conscious mind. how ppl r able to predict the future..etc.
of course it can't be proven, but perhaps if we start disecting people with psi ability and slice them up in thin wittle pieces like Einstein's brain we can start research!
good luck looking 4 volunteers
Wolfsbane909 1 year ago
@edgaritoaqui i don't get why people keep evading what they can't easily understand, i guess because it's hard and they don't want to deal with it... instead they take " math formulas" cientific road , it's sad.
leenaguer 1 year ago
@leenaguer Just prove any philosopher's point....just have some credible proof that what he/she is saying makes sense....its all it takes to make us scientists happy. I am not saying Jung is wrong I am saying is that he should support his arguments or philosophy with measurable and precise experiments.
edgaritoaqui 1 year ago
@edgaritoaqui He did. And many others have. Many. Many others.
paerarru 1 year ago
@paerarru agree. And @edgaritoaqui, "we scientists" often form theories before we have empirical evidence to actually prove them. This does not make them invalid or wrong, we then set out to try and prove them. But we often fail. And then the theory is refined or even completely changed. The inquiring mind is at the heart of science, not reductionism to numbers (which at the end of the day are also symbols.) (tbc)
indig0ding0 1 year ago 2
@paerarru and @edgaritoaqui As scientist you may be interested in learning more about the process of "logic" in its purest sense to help add some weight to your arguments. I understand the need to be aware of charlatans, zealots and those who would have us give up all our critical faculties, so I support your cause for rational thinking. But we also must not throw the baby out with the bath water. There are many great minds who have much to teach us beyond the strict sciences and mathematics.
indig0ding0 1 year ago 2
@edgaritoaqui - as scientist who has stumbled across Jung, you might want to check out "Symphony of Science - We are all Connected" here on you-tube. Hope you enjoy it. I do! :-)
indig0ding0 1 year ago
@leenaguer - not only that, they wholly ignore that number / quantity & processes (formula, functions) are just shorthands to express how the universe works, and that in many other cultures they've always been known to come entirely from god. personally, i think they take the soul out of it because they don't want to be reminded that they have used it to build hell, instead of heaven on earth.
randomlaughingman 1 year ago
Jung is both a scientist and a meta-physician. He understood, intuitively, the world explained by quantum physics: that is, that the material world, appears in time and space, but that it is created by consciousness and intention.
When speaking of alchemy, he is not talking of chemical interactions, but of the meta-physical transmutation of base elements into gold - that is raising vibration and awareness.
Raynmanification 2 years ago 2
I emphasize my surprise because by Jung's time chemistry was already a scientic discipline...and he stills talking about alchemy! thats y im surprise.
edgaritoaqui 2 years ago
im supprise he's talking about alchemy as it was valid and scientific...there is no alchemy people,....chemistry is the real scientific truth that explains all molecular phenomena...Carl Jung is a great philosopher but not a scientist.
edgaritoaqui 2 years ago
And you know this because you've studied alchemy? No?
Alchemy came before chemistry. Your "real scientific truth" had its roots in alchemy. I wonder why they would base a scientific discipline on something that (according to you) doesn't exist.
Feel4Peace 2 years ago
we all learn this in our first semester of chemistry...how people tried to convert metal to gold...even Newton worked with metals like that, im not saying alchemy never existed im simply saying that now a days alchemy has no scientific value..thats all.
edgaritoaqui 2 years ago
Didn't mean to jump on you like that. Alchemy was used to create medicines from herbs and minerals (and animals I suppose). The purpose is to purify the substance being worked with. It is about much more than turning lead into gold. It is about refining all kinds of things, and that includes the practitioner. Chemistry is completely mechanistic. Alchemy is Chemistry with spirit. At least that's my take on it.
Feel4Peace 2 years ago
Why did he painted his face silver?
borceroy 2 years ago
in a mystirious way and one of my highlighting points in my life was that i started traveling through India and that several months later i arrived in the little CGJ castle of Bollingen..
...
Ziggurathss 2 years ago
Hutch41 2 years ago
Yes. It's quite wonderful isn't it? He had his own personal little demon. That's great. And he's heralded and lionized by dupes as having been some sort of visionary in the business of what's actually the business of producing great quantities of gibberish.
kevinneslund 2 years ago
Carl Jung......the thinking mans Barry Manilow.
You doubt it ?
Compare Mandy with Philemon from the Liber Novus and I'm sure you will all agree with me.
Hutch41 2 years ago
it sounds like he's talking about cause and effect, why does he call it alchemy?
mebe84 2 years ago 4