@micxyzify we exist man.. Harness it dont be afraid to act.. Words are uneccessary.. The explanation is the action.. Leave it and keep moving in the now with tha heart
I wonder how Jung would clarify someone who actually has control of those reactions to archetypes - like I can...I just see through all the bulls*&t and see the real person inside. Then I react. Is that something everyone can do?
I loveJung's thoughts about those of us who see in another our own archtypes our anima and then we are "captured"....I have been there and as Jung says "he was such a business"....and yet I cannot get this person out of my head and dont even want to......I obviously could never be "indifferent" to my man...this has resulted in much drama, volatility and upset during our time together.but I would not have missed it for the world....It is impossible for me to imagine life without him. love him.
@thethirdq I'm pleased you like them. I have LOTS of Jungian insight regarding the journey of a famous celebrity thru these paths at my site "trailopen." under Britneyzian Prophecies. Let me know what you think.
I believe he knew what he was talking about. Due to religious and political influence we choose personas that we wish to wear. But if we don't like the mask that we put on hey person will develop a neurosis. And he knew that 80 years ago when even people today don't know that. They can't comprehend it. So they call it fraud??? Whatever! I like to think my brain does to thinking for me not my dick (Freud).
He studied and pushed the envelope on a foreign subject at that time... the human psyche. IMO he's best work was on synchronisity and realizing this probably had a great impact on his understanding of the collective unconscious. We live in a big universe, were our senses are being constantly being assaulted by stimuli but due to sensory adaptation we only consciously receive a small fraction of this. He understood this. We are also products of our surrounding environments, hence archetypes.
@jungian212 you should read his collection of speeches dealing with his explanation and break down of the Eastern Concept of the Kundalini, it would blow your mind!!!lol!!!
@frizbeee YES!!!!!!! that is it I am not sure of the links because I have read the book maybe four times!!!!lol!!! I mean the most simplistic gesture is soooooo appreciated as is the explanation and his observation on Eastern belief systems at the core and how we differ psychologically here in the West he even provided a reason why!!!!
To call Jung a fraud is the same blind ignorance that he speaks about in this video. No he wasn't a God but a man who was liable to fallacies that comes with being human.
You are very right about individualism and detachment and inability to be aware of the need for belonging. Especially for those who are naturally extroverts to face the world full of detachment, greed, fear of others can make one feel very depressed, because as i have mentioned One thing is to be aware for yourself and another to make aware others which is a hard task and a reason for one to pursue career in psychotherapy perhaps
Transference -process by which Emotions and Desires originally associated with One person, such as a parent or sibling, are unconsciously shifted to another person, especially to the analyst.
So Emotions can be manipulated by the Therapist. In a Good or Bad Way, once he is in control of those of a patient! And thats very very dangerous if the therapist is crap!
@rimaaelita Yes, this is very true, and there are many useless therapists, altho even a bad therapist can be of good use. It is sometimes only necessary for the client to speak about things he never ordinarily would for there to be a beneficial effect, even if the therapist is made of wood.. But before we get all crazy about our "transference-counter-transference with the therapist, keep in mind you are engaging in transference/projections with your family and friends as well.
it's really rarity to see something like this. But the truth is, nobody... i mean no one really trutfully understand what is tranference is. In the words of neuropsychology... transference is something like a memory mark left by amygdala, but not amygdala alone.
@apxeli It seems to me a lot more plausible - and OBVIOUS - that after sharing deep-seated notions about oneself to a particular person would create an emotional attachment to that person. It occurs in almost every case of therapy, confessing to priesthood, etc. This "amygdala" business is the real unknown here, and it's silly to speak of parts of the brain doing this, that or the other thing. It doesn't help anyone achieve any more mental health.
sorry, i was drunk when i wrote that. but transference occurs even in everyday life. it is not a phenomenom, which restricted inside a practice. People are doing unconcious processing always, when they meet new or familiar people. People are trying to create emotional link constantly and that's why this approach is called psychodynamic.
@apxeli Yes, I agree transference is a common phenomenon, and part of my research shows a celebrity with such a "transference" leading into schizophrenia, which is my specialty. I will have posted an introductory Video here as "TheBritster_w/royMasters" on YouTube. If you goto my website trailopen, and goto Light4Britney, you will see (what i think) is no better illustration in reality-video.
From the outside the most recent observation on psychology and analysis is that it is for the rich. Those who have money and can "afford" the treatments. Seeing this fabrication in many of Jung's students who have a "higher mystic justification to study Jung," in their studies they miss in large part the basics of psychology treatment---that every-day man should understand...
I dont understand why would the transference can be a problem if only through transference change is possible. Of course you have to have a therapist who has the sense of integrity for themselves before they will be able to reflect that on you and thats a tricky part of finding professional who will not get personal during your therapy.
@rimaaelita Yes, the AWARENESS of the "transference" is ultimately beneficial. I'm not quite sure of your use of the word "personal," in your desire that the therapist not be. It's impossible for the therapist to be totally impersonal, yet with both of you aware that there is an emotional component to the relationship, one can begin to see that the emotion u r carrying into the therapy is the same emotion that's screwing you up in the "real" world.
@obiwan1947 yes it does screw you but hopefully when handled properly during the therapy you will be able to learn with the help of the therapist the sufficent way of handling those emotions. It will be distaster to Repress your Emotions in real world just because of inability to handle them or negative experience of handling them during therapy.
@obiwan1947 so are you saying that the awarness of transference doesnt change your primitive emotional reactions. well no need to spend years in therapy and 1000000pounds of money
I think basically psychotherapy hooks you up on emotions and makes you fight against them :) they create addiction, although healthier than drugs, or maybe not!
@rimaaelita You dont go into therapy to "fight your emotions." You become AWARE of your emotions as (within therapy) often seeing your emotional reaction to things being stated by ur shrink as your own subjective perception as being skewed and tortured, and you see that you have been reacting to (one of) your parents in the exact same irrational way. This awareness can lead to awareness of childhood trauma. Now EMOTIONS will run wild at this point, and a good therapist can help deal w/the anger.
@rimaaelita The "AWARENESS" will reduce the effects of the emotional tidal waves which presently overun you. As you see clearly, the emotional storms become less powerful until they fade away. (The truth shall set you free)
@obiwan1947 I am really really wondering when is the point where they fade away, how many times is enough for one to become in control . As I feel that awarness of tranference is quite an anxious thing in itslef. You are aware when youve done it but still not able to change anything about it. that is so unpleasant. and also- do you always need the therapist to be a major part of this process, or you can internally overcome it, just by intellectualising???
@rimaaelita You cant get better by intellectualizing it. Go to fhu_dot_com and download "Be Still & Know" Observation Exercise; or my website trailopen _ dot_ com you can listen to it and my initial reactions for free
@rimaaelita the transference is not a problem as long as it doesn't affect you on long terms. i mean it 's a bound as long as one needs a therapist. the transference can be a problem when the problem got solved but you still transfer. you need to cut that on your pacient at a certain moment so that the pacient can cut on you when he doesn t need the therapeutical process anymore. and yes, it's tricky with "getting personal".
seems like u really understand the thing. Not everybody, even therapeutics practically understand or recognize, what the tranference is. It's clearly the most important phenomenom in a therapeutic process.
@apxeli thanks , well...i m doing my best. yes, it's important. but nowadays there are therapies where transference isn't used anymore...it depends on the therapy. i mean with "it s not used anymore" that it's not a "rule" as in classical psycodinamic therapies, but it still exists (not both sided) but a lousy therapist can transfer involuntarily things on his patient. have a nice day.
You're right. They don't have to use transference, because nowdays there's so much drugs to manipulate, numb or generate feelings. That's why cognitive approach(for example) also works. Analysing tranference would be time consuming and nowdays people want results faster. But I would still defend psychodynamic approach, because the results are more 'genuine' and transference analysis makes you more selfaware, which is not a bad thing imo.
@apxeli why manipulate and numb emotions - we will be like robots ! super rational robots! its better to be AWARE and make Others AWARE so no sadness and dissapointment follows after experiencing emotions of Yours and Others. Just understanding of our mutual Cravings for Emotions and Desires to come true. :)
Might be because people admire atheism and individualism nowdays. They don't understand the importance of roots and importance of belonging. They think pursuiting these goals give them power over others and ability to be more rational, but they are wrong. In terms of Jung, people need their archetypes. Also one thing might be because R. Dawkins is somewhat leading the depate of science and religion. He bear's David Hume's heritage in his thinking but at the same time seem to be unaware of Kant
@apxeli Anti-psychotic drugs do not interfere with transference phenomena. It is too deeply rooted in the personality. Also, I do not agree that "analyzing transference" takes alot of time. It can easily be done in less than a minute: In my video, you'll see a celebrity who has a TREMENDOUS transference problems w/her boyfriend. If u r in that situation, you can say to somebody "wait a minute," why do you think his statement here is taken in this manner?" and transference is revealed instantly.
This is VERY deep. I have been in this situation myself. Without knowledge of Jung's "Psychology of the Transference" I would have been lost and would have exploited others.
I WENT TO HAVE A LOOK TO HIS HOUSE AS I LIVE IN ZURICH. I TOOK SOME PRETTY PICS OF IT. IS A WONDERFUL PLACE... SO PEACEFUL...! IN HIS MEMORIES WROTE THAT A PLACE TO CONTACT WHO DONT BELONG TO THIS WORLD...
Slash said that Van Halen is the archetypal rock band. Fine. One could say that Lagasse is the archetypal chef. Or that Lincoln is the archetypal president. But Jung didn't mean the same sort of thing. He said that archetypes exist in and of themselves. There were no rock bands in neolithic times, nor chefs and nor presidents. All Jung did was invent the word. Beyond that, the term archetype is meaningless unless one wants to invent one.
@Darrell861 Be careful, just change "archetypal" to "prototypical", then you'll be alright. Your the only one doing the inventing here. Creating problems where there are none.
@Darrell861 That's what is meant. Anything else is just provisional. He doesn't have knowledge of psychoanalysis or spoke of the jungian term of 'archetypal'. I think he meant to say prototypical and there is no assumption here.
@07Aristotle Archetypes can be invented. Jung never defined just how many archetypes there are. There could be an archetypal cat food. Okay, Mr. Jung...anything you say.
@Darrell861 'Jung never defined just how many archetypes there are.'
Just because there was not an upper limit does not mean they were invented.
'There could be an archetypal cat food. Okay, Mr. Jung...anything you say.'
I think, here, is a confusion of the jungian definition of an 'archetype' to the definition of a prototype. There is how ever, according to opinion, a prototypical cat food, which is better suited. The prototypical phone, rock band, president, chef etc.
@07Aristotle Slash does not need to be corrected on his choice of words. He is not the only one to use the term archetypal. Jung let the cat out of the bag by inventing the term. He never defined an upper limit on how many archetypes there are.
@Darrell861 Slash did not have knowledge of jungian archetypes, therefore, he miss used the word 'archetype', when he really meant prototype. I'll conclude.
@07Aristotle Jung invented the term and now people who have perhaps never heard of Jung use the term at will. Jung used inductive logic in his attempt to expalin what the word meant. He never defined an upper limit on just how many archtypes there are.
@AnnoyingTypoSyndrome Please quote the sentences you refer to. Your putting words in his mouth with "the analyst takes over..." is the obvious result of transference. You seem unsure of what you want to say. Be specific, because your "if he had said" sounds more superior.
When he refers to "it", he is referring to the archetype that possesses her. Transference happens to both parties involved. He needed to help her on her way, and he did. That is all that counts. He never said he wanted to shag her (though he might have and perhaps did). He gave her something "incorruptable" to take away with herself always, an image of a god, not a Christian God, but a god image.
Jung was a complete fraud, traumatized and controlled, probably abused by jesuits in some early life ritual. He remained scared to death of them his entire life and never got to visit the Vatican because he would faint at the train station and cancel the trip. If you listen to a video such as this one without preconceived notions about how great Jung was, you'll easily see people have been taken for a ride. Jung never "explored" his "unconscious".
@suddenlyitsobvious The only person who is a fraud here is you. You get the stories of Freud and Jung mixed up. You dont know who is who or what is what. Stop speaking out of your ass and read one of their books instead of making yourself look like a complete dunce.
You're the fraud, dumb, arrogant, a coward and a hypocrite, who needs to shield off his youtube channel from other youtubers.
The content of your reply is below any standard.
I get the stories of Freud & Jung mixed up?! No I don't.
I don't know who is who or what is what?
You are not saying anything. Your post is completely uninformative. Don't talk to me anymore you dumb hypocrite & the reason I have to say this is I can't BLOCK YOU. Just go away.
In Jung's original account of the case study of this dream, the client got up and walked out on him. In psychotherapy, no means no. Jung can't admit that a client walked out on him, and so he deifies himself. A psychotherapist who operates under the a priori assumption of transference immediately sets himself up as being in a position of power. He is God, and the client then becomes dependent on him. This attitude is unethical on Jung's part.
@Darrell861 Please give references for your statement(s) on the original case study. That is quite a leap of judgment you make, speaking about "what Jung can't admit to..." From "Darrell861." Your statement regarding transference indicates a lack ofl understanding. A psychotherapist - or as I point out in Britneyzian Prophecies - ANYBODY who receives a person's innermost secrets, thoughts, complexes, etc. will also be the recipient of that person's strong emotions; positive and/or negative.
@obiwan1947 The case study of a client walking out on Jung is cited by Mary Ann Mattoon in Applied Dream Analysis: A Jungian Approach. V. H. Winston & Sons. Washington, D.C. 1978, p. 179. She cites CW7, par.212-214, 217.
@Darrell861 A client walking out on a therapist is not a big deal. That happens all the time. But you're indicating it is the exact same client he is relating to in the video. Where is THAT reference?
@obiwan1947 It's a female client who has a dream of her father holding her in his arms in a wheat field. That reference is in the sources I have already cited. Mattoon justifies the transference by saying that the interpretation "acted" for the dreamer because it helped her to walk out on Jung. In other words, if a client agrees with Jung, he is right. If he says no and disagrees, then Jung is also right. It was the same client and the same case study.
@Darrell861 OIC now. First place, what is our purpose in communicating on this? I wish to point out that a transference is never "justified." It IS. It exists. How aware of it one is the key - or ammunition - with which a war in the name of clarity is fought. If you would go to teh Britneyzian Prophecies you would see how the realization of the transference properties has immense value in ACTUALLY IMPROVING THE MENTAL HEALTH of another human being. Was Jung a saint? Cartainly not. Duz he hav 2b?
@obiwan1947 Jung did not say "a transference." He said "the transference." This means that he took transference as an a priori given. The cllient is analyzed before he haseven walked in the door. My purpose in communicating this is that transference cannot be used as validating dream interpretation by a licensed professional. No one ever taught Jung how to interpret dreams. He made dreams mean what he wanted them to mean. He never admitted to making a mistake in dream interpretation.
I am VERy dissapointed in this particular video, because it expresses that Jung felt as thoug he had a "king king" like superiority over his subjects.
this is reflected in the way he addresses his subjects as "IT", rather than "he or she", at least TWICE.
If he had said that "the analist takes over the authorative role of a parent, where the subject "trusts" the analyst to be correct, because of their natural authority", then fair enough.
@AnnoyingTypoSyndrome "Transference "can be a manipulative term. If the client agrees with the analyst, then the analyst is right. If the client disagrees with the analyst, then the client is experiencing transference. The analyst is right. Jung was the Dr. Phil of his time. Oh, and, the Wizard of Oz of his time. Talk about a megolomaniac.
@07Aristotle Jung said that the initial dreams presented to him by clients most often have to do with him. In other words, he can cause the content of the initial dream and then analyze it himself even if the client disagrees with the interpretation. One of his clients got up and walked out on him when he tried to insist that his transference interpretation matched the meaning of the dream (CW7, par.217). Transference can be a manipulative term. It is not a given.
@Darrell861 I dont understand, transference is not a word used to manipulate patients? transference, by definition, is the transfer of the emotional content from childhood admiration of the parents to an object that resembles them in terms of certain "characteristics" this person displays. its kind of like the dissolution of the oepidal or electra complex, in freud's latency period, transferring to an appropriate partner.
@07Aristotle When a client says "no" to a psychotherapist, "no" means "no." Any psychotherapist who tries to overide that "no" by citing transference is operating unethically by showing no respect for the integrity of the client. That psychotherapist is in the wrong profession. Transference becomes a cheap trick. This is what Jung does in CW7, par.217. It is one thing to be knowledgable on comparative religion. It is quite another to be a competant psychotherapist.
@Darrell861 Transference a cheap trick!? absolutely not, it is an involuntary phenomenon that happens when a patient transfers his emotional view of the parents to the therapist. it is kind of like "falling in love". this is no trick, it is an involuntary phenomenon.
@07Aristotle The female client referred to by Jung in CW7, par. 217 did not form an emotional attachment to Jung. She walked out on him because he tried to play the transference card. She said no, that was not a dream about you. It was a dream about my father. When a client says no, no means no. Jung's conduct was unethical for two reasons: First, he claimed to have the ability to interpret the dreams of his clients. Second, he showed no respect for the integrity of this client.
@Darrell861 Wow...wow what happened to carl jung !? where did mary ann mattoon come in the picture, we are talking about transference not dreams, its a different subject.
@07Aristotle You asked for the title of the book. You asked for the name of the publisher. You asked for the excerpt. Mattoon cites a quote from Jung concerning transference and how Jung used transference to justify his interpretation of a dream of one of his clients. The client rejected the interpretation and walked out on Jung. As of 1978 Mattoon was regarded as the foremost expert on everything Jung said about dream interpretation.
@Justgetmein Transference is a mechanism that exists. It is not tantamount to "analysis," as you mistakenly presume. If I pour out all my hidden motives, complexes, emotions, etc to you, I will develop a strong emotional component towards what you think of me. This is the "transference." It is both a tool - and an obstacle - for therapy. It is not THE therapy, but that dream sequence is so common a theme (enslavement as love; parental-like devotion to a love object, etc) that it hardly matters.
@xtrancemaniacx - Hey Extra, you're welcome. If you'd like to see something different vis-a-vis Jung and psychoanalysis, check out my "Britneyzian Prophecies" at trailopendotcom; in which i intergrate Jung's insights vis-a-vis a very real individual.
@Guitarstring187 Because science doesn't like the idea that there is something else outside the realm of the material (or inside) ! If it cannot be measured or studied in a lab of sorts it cannot exist!
My definition of archetype(s): A set of characters within the psyche which act as the instinct of identification, or categories of identification tendencies. In other words, you did not choose the stereotypical role you played in high school, you don't go "hmmm, i'll be a emo or nerd..." no, an inner force (archetype) drew you instinctively towards identifying with a character. The mold or frame of the archetype can provide a coherence within ones "I am" self definition. my 2 cents :)
Where do the archetypes come from? In his earlier work, Jung tried to link the archetypes to heredity and regarded them as instinctual. We are born with these patterns which structure our imagination and make it distinctly human. Archetypes are thus very closely linked to our bodies. In his later work, Jung was convinced that the archetypes are psychoid, that is, "they shape matter (nature) as well as mind (psyche)"
The etymology of the archtype is within the spirit realm, surrounding us as a kind of parallel universe. I have a link for a chapter in my book at trailopen dot. com It deals with many archtypes I've become or have become entangled (encountered?) on my journey. A dramatic LSD experience long ago when i had to face my own "dissociated" demons or PTSD. This took the form of sexual figures flooding the brain while attempting coitis on a paradise to hell experince.
I've many books on Jung, and a bit of the Bollinger series. Jung is so insightful. But if you enter a dark room and take a pict of a statue, it's a clear representation of only one view. Hereditary would be impossible to prove. "Instinctual" is closer to the spirit world, which is "naturally" MADE UP of the dynamisms, archtypes, etc. These are also called Principalities and Powers in the Bible.
You are amaizing and very nobel man.The picture of the primal essence of the our life is that thruth,you brought to us that kind of knowledge,the knowledge of soul,the primal essence of human being
with all those bad projections out of that
primal essence....Thank you for....
And....secret of heart....searching through the night of science...right to truth of essence....essence of life
Normally the ProphetfromTrailopen is not so forgiving. You, Miracle67, have failed to watch the DVD all the way to the end, where the information you see is posted for Amazonian purchase. However, because you are wise enough to recognize the genius of CG, you are forgiven and encouraged to see the last ten seconds or so.
ehmmm... i think he says "numinous experience" and not "luminous experience" as your text on the video clip suggests, he uses "numinous" often in his writings, but i could be wrong, and i thank you for posting this regardless! excellent material.
You are correct. I just haven't gotten around to fixing it yet. If you want to see more of CG in "action" re his "luminous use of numinous" you can see his insights in the Britneyzian Prophecies 1-8
Hi, Obiwan1947, first of all thanks a lot for posting this video, but I was wondering if you could explain to what Jung meant by saying that the girl would be complete, independent when she could "HOLD" that experience. Thanks a lot in advance.
This is one of the best questions I've ever receieved on the web, and I'll start off by saying I can't possibly answer in the 500 characters I'm allowed. When does an "epipheny", a "realization," a "breakthrough occur," and result in life-personality and awareness all growing and re-integrating as a result, and when is it merely a "Oh I see." Some people are so full of "guile" (& sarcasm) that they can hold nothing permanently. I suppose they would be the OPPOSITE of the girl "getting it."
In the very last 5 seconds of the video, I text in this is taken from "A Matter of Heart" DVD, available at Amazon, etc; An excellent 107 minute documentary on Dr Jung.
The relevance of Jungian perspective is given throughout the "Britneyzian Prophecy", for the more patient amongst my viewers.
i appreciate the subtitles!
jamesreling 3 weeks ago
@micxyzify we exist man.. Harness it dont be afraid to act.. Words are uneccessary.. The explanation is the action.. Leave it and keep moving in the now with tha heart
fiendingspeedflorida 3 weeks ago
he's great
amytriptalene 1 month ago
Please give example(s)
obiwan1947 5 months ago
I wonder how Jung would clarify someone who actually has control of those reactions to archetypes - like I can...I just see through all the bulls*&t and see the real person inside. Then I react. Is that something everyone can do?
micxyzify 5 months ago
I wonder whats in the pipe.
lazyfreedom98 5 months ago
I loveJung's thoughts about those of us who see in another our own archtypes our anima and then we are "captured"....I have been there and as Jung says "he was such a business"....and yet I cannot get this person out of my head and dont even want to......I obviously could never be "indifferent" to my man...this has resulted in much drama, volatility and upset during our time together.but I would not have missed it for the world....It is impossible for me to imagine life without him. love him.
Cardywhite111 5 months ago
Please make morevideos like this!
thethirdq 8 months ago
@thethirdq I'm pleased you like them. I have LOTS of Jungian insight regarding the journey of a famous celebrity thru these paths at my site "trailopen." under Britneyzian Prophecies. Let me know what you think.
obiwan1947 8 months ago
Please make morevideos like this!
thethirdq 8 months ago
I believe he knew what he was talking about. Due to religious and political influence we choose personas that we wish to wear. But if we don't like the mask that we put on hey person will develop a neurosis. And he knew that 80 years ago when even people today don't know that. They can't comprehend it. So they call it fraud??? Whatever! I like to think my brain does to thinking for me not my dick (Freud).
jungian212 8 months ago 2
He studied and pushed the envelope on a foreign subject at that time... the human psyche. IMO he's best work was on synchronisity and realizing this probably had a great impact on his understanding of the collective unconscious. We live in a big universe, were our senses are being constantly being assaulted by stimuli but due to sensory adaptation we only consciously receive a small fraction of this. He understood this. We are also products of our surrounding environments, hence archetypes.
jungian212 8 months ago 2
@jungian212 you should read his collection of speeches dealing with his explanation and break down of the Eastern Concept of the Kundalini, it would blow your mind!!!lol!!!
sensualwisdom570 8 months ago 2
@sensualwisdom570
Do you mean his book "The Psychology of Kundalini Yoga? Or is there a link to these speeches?
Thank you
frizbeee 8 months ago
@frizbeee YES!!!!!!! that is it I am not sure of the links because I have read the book maybe four times!!!!lol!!! I mean the most simplistic gesture is soooooo appreciated as is the explanation and his observation on Eastern belief systems at the core and how we differ psychologically here in the West he even provided a reason why!!!!
sensualwisdom570 7 months ago
To call Jung a fraud is the same blind ignorance that he speaks about in this video. No he wasn't a God but a man who was liable to fallacies that comes with being human.
jungian212 8 months ago
You are very right about individualism and detachment and inability to be aware of the need for belonging. Especially for those who are naturally extroverts to face the world full of detachment, greed, fear of others can make one feel very depressed, because as i have mentioned One thing is to be aware for yourself and another to make aware others which is a hard task and a reason for one to pursue career in psychotherapy perhaps
rimaaelita 9 months ago
Transference -process by which Emotions and Desires originally associated with One person, such as a parent or sibling, are unconsciously shifted to another person, especially to the analyst.
So Emotions can be manipulated by the Therapist. In a Good or Bad Way, once he is in control of those of a patient! And thats very very dangerous if the therapist is crap!
rimaaelita 9 months ago
@rimaaelita Yes, this is very true, and there are many useless therapists, altho even a bad therapist can be of good use. It is sometimes only necessary for the client to speak about things he never ordinarily would for there to be a beneficial effect, even if the therapist is made of wood.. But before we get all crazy about our "transference-counter-transference with the therapist, keep in mind you are engaging in transference/projections with your family and friends as well.
obiwan1947 9 months ago
it's really rarity to see something like this. But the truth is, nobody... i mean no one really trutfully understand what is tranference is. In the words of neuropsychology... transference is something like a memory mark left by amygdala, but not amygdala alone.
apxeli 9 months ago
@apxeli It seems to me a lot more plausible - and OBVIOUS - that after sharing deep-seated notions about oneself to a particular person would create an emotional attachment to that person. It occurs in almost every case of therapy, confessing to priesthood, etc. This "amygdala" business is the real unknown here, and it's silly to speak of parts of the brain doing this, that or the other thing. It doesn't help anyone achieve any more mental health.
obiwan1947 9 months ago
sorry, i was drunk when i wrote that. but transference occurs even in everyday life. it is not a phenomenom, which restricted inside a practice. People are doing unconcious processing always, when they meet new or familiar people. People are trying to create emotional link constantly and that's why this approach is called psychodynamic.
apxeli 9 months ago
@apxeli Yes, I agree transference is a common phenomenon, and part of my research shows a celebrity with such a "transference" leading into schizophrenia, which is my specialty. I will have posted an introductory Video here as "TheBritster_w/royMasters" on YouTube. If you goto my website trailopen, and goto Light4Britney, you will see (what i think) is no better illustration in reality-video.
obiwan1947 9 months ago
yea thank you
onelovedejembe 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
From the outside the most recent observation on psychology and analysis is that it is for the rich. Those who have money and can "afford" the treatments. Seeing this fabrication in many of Jung's students who have a "higher mystic justification to study Jung," in their studies they miss in large part the basics of psychology treatment---that every-day man should understand...
jeremy4ga 10 months ago
"He is clay in her fingers" LOVE IT! :)
rimaaelita 11 months ago
I dont understand why would the transference can be a problem if only through transference change is possible. Of course you have to have a therapist who has the sense of integrity for themselves before they will be able to reflect that on you and thats a tricky part of finding professional who will not get personal during your therapy.
rimaaelita 11 months ago
@rimaaelita Yes, the AWARENESS of the "transference" is ultimately beneficial. I'm not quite sure of your use of the word "personal," in your desire that the therapist not be. It's impossible for the therapist to be totally impersonal, yet with both of you aware that there is an emotional component to the relationship, one can begin to see that the emotion u r carrying into the therapy is the same emotion that's screwing you up in the "real" world.
obiwan1947 11 months ago
@obiwan1947 yes it does screw you but hopefully when handled properly during the therapy you will be able to learn with the help of the therapist the sufficent way of handling those emotions. It will be distaster to Repress your Emotions in real world just because of inability to handle them or negative experience of handling them during therapy.
rimaaelita 11 months ago
@obiwan1947 so are you saying that the awarness of transference doesnt change your primitive emotional reactions. well no need to spend years in therapy and 1000000pounds of money
I think basically psychotherapy hooks you up on emotions and makes you fight against them :) they create addiction, although healthier than drugs, or maybe not!
rimaaelita 9 months ago
@rimaaelita You dont go into therapy to "fight your emotions." You become AWARE of your emotions as (within therapy) often seeing your emotional reaction to things being stated by ur shrink as your own subjective perception as being skewed and tortured, and you see that you have been reacting to (one of) your parents in the exact same irrational way. This awareness can lead to awareness of childhood trauma. Now EMOTIONS will run wild at this point, and a good therapist can help deal w/the anger.
obiwan1947 9 months ago
@rimaaelita The "AWARENESS" will reduce the effects of the emotional tidal waves which presently overun you. As you see clearly, the emotional storms become less powerful until they fade away. (The truth shall set you free)
obiwan1947 9 months ago
@obiwan1947 I am really really wondering when is the point where they fade away, how many times is enough for one to become in control . As I feel that awarness of tranference is quite an anxious thing in itslef. You are aware when youve done it but still not able to change anything about it. that is so unpleasant. and also- do you always need the therapist to be a major part of this process, or you can internally overcome it, just by intellectualising???
rimaaelita 9 months ago
@rimaaelita You cant get better by intellectualizing it. Go to fhu_dot_com and download "Be Still & Know" Observation Exercise; or my website trailopen _ dot_ com you can listen to it and my initial reactions for free
obiwan1947 9 months ago
@rimaaelita the transference is not a problem as long as it doesn't affect you on long terms. i mean it 's a bound as long as one needs a therapist. the transference can be a problem when the problem got solved but you still transfer. you need to cut that on your pacient at a certain moment so that the pacient can cut on you when he doesn t need the therapeutical process anymore. and yes, it's tricky with "getting personal".
joannahewson 9 months ago
seems like u really understand the thing. Not everybody, even therapeutics practically understand or recognize, what the tranference is. It's clearly the most important phenomenom in a therapeutic process.
apxeli 9 months ago
@apxeli thanks , well...i m doing my best. yes, it's important. but nowadays there are therapies where transference isn't used anymore...it depends on the therapy. i mean with "it s not used anymore" that it's not a "rule" as in classical psycodinamic therapies, but it still exists (not both sided) but a lousy therapist can transfer involuntarily things on his patient. have a nice day.
joannahewson 9 months ago
You're right. They don't have to use transference, because nowdays there's so much drugs to manipulate, numb or generate feelings. That's why cognitive approach(for example) also works. Analysing tranference would be time consuming and nowdays people want results faster. But I would still defend psychodynamic approach, because the results are more 'genuine' and transference analysis makes you more selfaware, which is not a bad thing imo.
apxeli 9 months ago
Comment removed
joannahewson 9 months ago
@apxeli yep , you're right and psychodynamics is the base of a lot of others approaches so ...in a way or another i defend it too :)
joannahewson 9 months ago
@apxeli why manipulate and numb emotions - we will be like robots ! super rational robots! its better to be AWARE and make Others AWARE so no sadness and dissapointment follows after experiencing emotions of Yours and Others. Just understanding of our mutual Cravings for Emotions and Desires to come true. :)
rimaaelita 9 months ago
Might be because people admire atheism and individualism nowdays. They don't understand the importance of roots and importance of belonging. They think pursuiting these goals give them power over others and ability to be more rational, but they are wrong. In terms of Jung, people need their archetypes. Also one thing might be because R. Dawkins is somewhat leading the depate of science and religion. He bear's David Hume's heritage in his thinking but at the same time seem to be unaware of Kant
apxeli 9 months ago
@apxeli Anti-psychotic drugs do not interfere with transference phenomena. It is too deeply rooted in the personality. Also, I do not agree that "analyzing transference" takes alot of time. It can easily be done in less than a minute: In my video, you'll see a celebrity who has a TREMENDOUS transference problems w/her boyfriend. If u r in that situation, you can say to somebody "wait a minute," why do you think his statement here is taken in this manner?" and transference is revealed instantly.
obiwan1947 9 months ago
@rimaaelita well , the answer is in what you say, plus read this page and it will be clear for you when the transference is a problem:)
joannahewson 9 months ago
The awareness of "transference" phenomena between oneself and others is very important for any self-aware human being.
obiwan1947 11 months ago
This is VERY deep. I have been in this situation myself. Without knowledge of Jung's "Psychology of the Transference" I would have been lost and would have exploited others.
gerryhiles 11 months ago
wot a cleaver man a legend !!!
pongoose77 1 year ago
Thank you. That was very very nice
obiwan1947 1 year ago
I WENT TO HAVE A LOOK TO HIS HOUSE AS I LIVE IN ZURICH. I TOOK SOME PRETTY PICS OF IT. IS A WONDERFUL PLACE... SO PEACEFUL...! IN HIS MEMORIES WROTE THAT A PLACE TO CONTACT WHO DONT BELONG TO THIS WORLD...
youtube.com/watch?v=76u3zAxZJhM
ThePoltergueist 1 year ago
"The acorn can become an oak, and not a donkey"
what a friggin revelation !
AnnoyingTypoSyndrome 1 year ago
@AnnoyingTypoSyndrome Please see my USE of Jung's video-observations on Britney Spears. I'll attach Video
obiwan1947 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
'now people who have perhaps never heard of Jung use the term at will'
Correct, but that doesn't mean that they used the term properly.
'He never defined an upper limit on just how many archtypes there are'
Again, just because there was no upper limit does not mean they were invented.
'Jung used inductive logic in his attempt to expalin what the word meant'
Be careful, it was deductive. "
07Aristotle 1 year ago
Slash said that Van Halen is the archetypal rock band. Fine. One could say that Lagasse is the archetypal chef. Or that Lincoln is the archetypal president. But Jung didn't mean the same sort of thing. He said that archetypes exist in and of themselves. There were no rock bands in neolithic times, nor chefs and nor presidents. All Jung did was invent the word. Beyond that, the term archetype is meaningless unless one wants to invent one.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Be careful, just change "archetypal" to "prototypical", then you'll be alright. Your the only one doing the inventing here. Creating problems where there are none.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle Slash did not say prototypical.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 That's what is meant. Anything else is just provisional. He doesn't have knowledge of psychoanalysis or spoke of the jungian term of 'archetypal'. I think he meant to say prototypical and there is no assumption here.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle Jung said archetypal. All people are born with archetypes.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@07Aristotle Archetypes can be invented. Jung never defined just how many archetypes there are. There could be an archetypal cat food. Okay, Mr. Jung...anything you say.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 'Jung never defined just how many archetypes there are.'
Just because there was not an upper limit does not mean they were invented.
'There could be an archetypal cat food. Okay, Mr. Jung...anything you say.'
I think, here, is a confusion of the jungian definition of an 'archetype' to the definition of a prototype. There is how ever, according to opinion, a prototypical cat food, which is better suited. The prototypical phone, rock band, president, chef etc.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle Slash does not need to be corrected on his choice of words. He is not the only one to use the term archetypal. Jung let the cat out of the bag by inventing the term. He never defined an upper limit on how many archetypes there are.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Slash did not have knowledge of jungian archetypes, therefore, he miss used the word 'archetype', when he really meant prototype. I'll conclude.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle Jung invented the term and now people who have perhaps never heard of Jung use the term at will. Jung used inductive logic in his attempt to expalin what the word meant. He never defined an upper limit on just how many archtypes there are.
Darrell861 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Darrell861 'now people who have perhaps never heard of Jung use the term at will'
Correct, but that doesn't mean that they used the term properly.
'He never defined an upper limit on just how many archtypes there are'
Again, just because there was no upper limit does not mean they were invented.
'Jung used inductive logic in his attempt to expalin what the word meant'
Be careful, it was deductive.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Darrell861 'now people who have perhaps never heard of Jung use the term at will'
Correct, but that doesn't mean that they used the term properly.
'He never defined an upper limit on just how many archtypes there are'
Again, just because there was no upper limit does not mean they were invented.
'Jung used inductive logic in his attempt to expalin what the word meant'
Be careful, it was deductive. "
07Aristotle 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Darrell861 'now people who have perhaps never heard of Jung use the term at will'
Correct, but that doesn't mean that they used the term properly.
'He never defined an upper limit on just how many archtypes there are'
Again, just because there was no upper limit does not mean they were invented.
'Jung used inductive logic in his attempt to expalin what the word meant'
Be careful, it was deductive. "
07Aristotle 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Darrell861 'now people who have perhaps never heard of Jung use the term at will'
Correct, but that doesn't mean that they used the term properly.
'He never defined an upper limit on just how many archtypes there are'
Again, just because there was no upper limit does not mean they were invented.
'Jung used inductive logic in his attempt to expalin what the word meant'
Be careful, it was deductive. "
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle I was talking about Slash.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle Jung never defined how many prototypes there are. Prototypes can be invented.
Darrell861 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Darrell861 'Jung never defined how many prototypes there are. Prototypes can be invented'
What?! What are you talking about? Jung never used prototypes in his literature.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
Comment removed
AnnoyingTypoSyndrome 1 year ago
@AnnoyingTypoSyndrome Please quote the sentences you refer to. Your putting words in his mouth with "the analyst takes over..." is the obvious result of transference. You seem unsure of what you want to say. Be specific, because your "if he had said" sounds more superior.
obiwan1947 1 year ago
@AnnoyingTypoSyndrome
When he refers to "it", he is referring to the archetype that possesses her. Transference happens to both parties involved. He needed to help her on her way, and he did. That is all that counts. He never said he wanted to shag her (though he might have and perhaps did). He gave her something "incorruptable" to take away with herself always, an image of a god, not a Christian God, but a god image.
jkbella 1 year ago
@jkbella:
Yep, i used that one, once - it works every time !
AnnoyingTypoSyndrome 1 year ago
@AnnoyingTypoSyndrome Do yourself a favor: Dont comment on these forums, you come off as an ignoramus.
freudian456 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@freudian456
Just look at your pathetic post at TypoSyndrome:
"Do yourself a favor: Dont comment on these forums, you come off as an ignoramus."
Uninformative also.
Why don't you just take a hike since you obviously got nothing to say?
Don't waste people's time. You got nothing. You're a pathetic fraud.
suddenlyitsobvious 1 year ago
Comment removed
AnnoyingTypoSyndrome 1 year ago
Comment removed
AnnoyingTypoSyndrome 1 year ago
Comment removed
AnnoyingTypoSyndrome 1 year ago
@AnnoyingTypoSyndrome
Jung was a complete fraud, traumatized and controlled, probably abused by jesuits in some early life ritual. He remained scared to death of them his entire life and never got to visit the Vatican because he would faint at the train station and cancel the trip. If you listen to a video such as this one without preconceived notions about how great Jung was, you'll easily see people have been taken for a ride. Jung never "explored" his "unconscious".
suddenlyitsobvious 1 year ago
@AnnoyingTypoSyndrome
Same thing for Krishnamurti, Ghandi and all these "greats". They were chosen for a mission and never in charge of their own minds.
You saw correctly: Jung's arrogance and misogyny shine through. His metastasized ego fed on people like a vampire on a virgin.
suddenlyitsobvious 1 year ago
@suddenlyitsobvious The only person who is a fraud here is you. You get the stories of Freud and Jung mixed up. You dont know who is who or what is what. Stop speaking out of your ass and read one of their books instead of making yourself look like a complete dunce.
freudian456 1 year ago
@freudian456
You're the fraud, dumb, arrogant, a coward and a hypocrite, who needs to shield off his youtube channel from other youtubers.
The content of your reply is below any standard.
I get the stories of Freud & Jung mixed up?! No I don't.
I don't know who is who or what is what?
You are not saying anything. Your post is completely uninformative. Don't talk to me anymore you dumb hypocrite & the reason I have to say this is I can't BLOCK YOU. Just go away.
suddenlyitsobvious 1 year ago
@AnnoyingTypoSyndrome Nonsense. Why don't you listen. He resisted all temptation.
gerryhiles 11 months ago
In Jung's original account of the case study of this dream, the client got up and walked out on him. In psychotherapy, no means no. Jung can't admit that a client walked out on him, and so he deifies himself. A psychotherapist who operates under the a priori assumption of transference immediately sets himself up as being in a position of power. He is God, and the client then becomes dependent on him. This attitude is unethical on Jung's part.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Please give references for your statement(s) on the original case study. That is quite a leap of judgment you make, speaking about "what Jung can't admit to..." From "Darrell861." Your statement regarding transference indicates a lack ofl understanding. A psychotherapist - or as I point out in Britneyzian Prophecies - ANYBODY who receives a person's innermost secrets, thoughts, complexes, etc. will also be the recipient of that person's strong emotions; positive and/or negative.
obiwan1947 1 year ago
@obiwan1947 The case study of a client walking out on Jung is cited by Mary Ann Mattoon in Applied Dream Analysis: A Jungian Approach. V. H. Winston & Sons. Washington, D.C. 1978, p. 179. She cites CW7, par.212-214, 217.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 A client walking out on a therapist is not a big deal. That happens all the time. But you're indicating it is the exact same client he is relating to in the video. Where is THAT reference?
obiwan1947 1 year ago
@obiwan1947 It's a female client who has a dream of her father holding her in his arms in a wheat field. That reference is in the sources I have already cited. Mattoon justifies the transference by saying that the interpretation "acted" for the dreamer because it helped her to walk out on Jung. In other words, if a client agrees with Jung, he is right. If he says no and disagrees, then Jung is also right. It was the same client and the same case study.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 OIC now. First place, what is our purpose in communicating on this? I wish to point out that a transference is never "justified." It IS. It exists. How aware of it one is the key - or ammunition - with which a war in the name of clarity is fought. If you would go to teh Britneyzian Prophecies you would see how the realization of the transference properties has immense value in ACTUALLY IMPROVING THE MENTAL HEALTH of another human being. Was Jung a saint? Cartainly not. Duz he hav 2b?
obiwan1947 1 year ago
@obiwan1947 Jung did not say "a transference." He said "the transference." This means that he took transference as an a priori given. The cllient is analyzed before he haseven walked in the door. My purpose in communicating this is that transference cannot be used as validating dream interpretation by a licensed professional. No one ever taught Jung how to interpret dreams. He made dreams mean what he wanted them to mean. He never admitted to making a mistake in dream interpretation.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861
I am VERy dissapointed in this particular video, because it expresses that Jung felt as thoug he had a "king king" like superiority over his subjects.
this is reflected in the way he addresses his subjects as "IT", rather than "he or she", at least TWICE.
If he had said that "the analist takes over the authorative role of a parent, where the subject "trusts" the analyst to be correct, because of their natural authority", then fair enough.
But it seems, he wanted to SHAG HER !
AnnoyingTypoSyndrome 1 year ago
@Darrell861:
He BLATANTLY felt sexually attracted to this particalaur subject, to the extent where he uses her as an object of "speculation".
And yet, does he nto describe himself as the "king king", and her as the helpless little woman, in his hands ?
Without realising it, he is verbally masturbating over this girl (who WE have never met).
This is the result of a "privelaged position in society".
AnnoyingTypoSyndrome 1 year ago
@AnnoyingTypoSyndrome "Transference "can be a manipulative term. If the client agrees with the analyst, then the analyst is right. If the client disagrees with the analyst, then the client is experiencing transference. The analyst is right. Jung was the Dr. Phil of his time. Oh, and, the Wizard of Oz of his time. Talk about a megolomaniac.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 that is not what transference is. you have it misunderstood, my friend.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle Jung said that the initial dreams presented to him by clients most often have to do with him. In other words, he can cause the content of the initial dream and then analyze it himself even if the client disagrees with the interpretation. One of his clients got up and walked out on him when he tried to insist that his transference interpretation matched the meaning of the dream (CW7, par.217). Transference can be a manipulative term. It is not a given.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 I dont understand, transference is not a word used to manipulate patients? transference, by definition, is the transfer of the emotional content from childhood admiration of the parents to an object that resembles them in terms of certain "characteristics" this person displays. its kind of like the dissolution of the oepidal or electra complex, in freud's latency period, transferring to an appropriate partner.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle When a client says "no" to a psychotherapist, "no" means "no." Any psychotherapist who tries to overide that "no" by citing transference is operating unethically by showing no respect for the integrity of the client. That psychotherapist is in the wrong profession. Transference becomes a cheap trick. This is what Jung does in CW7, par.217. It is one thing to be knowledgable on comparative religion. It is quite another to be a competant psychotherapist.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Transference a cheap trick!? absolutely not, it is an involuntary phenomenon that happens when a patient transfers his emotional view of the parents to the therapist. it is kind of like "falling in love". this is no trick, it is an involuntary phenomenon.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle Transference exists only if one believes it does.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 That's foolish, transference is a fact. one does not need to believe in a fact, they know.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
Comment removed
Darrell861 1 year ago
@07Aristotle The female client referred to by Jung in CW7, par. 217 did not form an emotional attachment to Jung. She walked out on him because he tried to play the transference card. She said no, that was not a dream about you. It was a dream about my father. When a client says no, no means no. Jung's conduct was unethical for two reasons: First, he claimed to have the ability to interpret the dreams of his clients. Second, he showed no respect for the integrity of this client.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 that's funny, that not how transference works. what book was this on?
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle The reference is to The Collected Works of Carl Jung, volume 7, paragraph 217.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 i cant find it, is this the title of the book? subtitle? or excerpt? who's the publisher?
07Aristotle 1 year ago
Comment removed
Darrell861 1 year ago
@07Aristotle The book is "Understanding Dreams," Mary Ann Mattoon, Spring Publications, Inc., 1984,. The quote is on p. 227.
Darrell861 1 year ago
@Darrell861 Wow...wow what happened to carl jung !? where did mary ann mattoon come in the picture, we are talking about transference not dreams, its a different subject.
07Aristotle 1 year ago
@07Aristotle You asked for the title of the book. You asked for the name of the publisher. You asked for the excerpt. Mattoon cites a quote from Jung concerning transference and how Jung used transference to justify his interpretation of a dream of one of his clients. The client rejected the interpretation and walked out on Jung. As of 1978 Mattoon was regarded as the foremost expert on everything Jung said about dream interpretation.
Darrell861 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Darrell861 What happened to this, "The reference is to The Collected Works of Carl Jung, volume 7, paragraph 217"? ?
07Aristotle 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Darrell861 what happened to this,"The reference is to The Collected Works of Carl Jung, volume 7, paragraph 217" ??
07Aristotle 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Darrell861 "The reference is to The Collected Works of Carl Jung, volume 7, paragraph 217" ???
07Aristotle 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Darrell861 What happened to this, "The reference is to The Collected Works of Carl Jung, volume 7, paragraph 217". ???
07Aristotle 1 year ago
Yes!
Justgetmein 1 year ago
@Justgetmein Transference is a mechanism that exists. It is not tantamount to "analysis," as you mistakenly presume. If I pour out all my hidden motives, complexes, emotions, etc to you, I will develop a strong emotional component towards what you think of me. This is the "transference." It is both a tool - and an obstacle - for therapy. It is not THE therapy, but that dream sequence is so common a theme (enslavement as love; parental-like devotion to a love object, etc) that it hardly matters.
obiwan1947 1 year ago
Oh My! I loved it, so so much!!
PsychoWerther 1 year ago
I know Jung must be smiling down on US:).......thinking "I TOLD U SO"! He was before his time.
muzicfrst 1 year ago
Thank You....Thank you soo sooooooo very much for sharing this clip !! :(
xtrancemaniacx 1 year ago
@xtrancemaniacx - Hey Extra, you're welcome. If you'd like to see something different vis-a-vis Jung and psychoanalysis, check out my "Britneyzian Prophecies" at trailopendotcom; in which i intergrate Jung's insights vis-a-vis a very real individual.
obiwan1947 1 year ago
dude that all made perfect sence why does science hat these guys hate them so
Guitarstring187 1 year ago
@Guitarstring187 Because science doesn't like the idea that there is something else outside the realm of the material (or inside) ! If it cannot be measured or studied in a lab of sorts it cannot exist!
brav0wing 1 year ago
My definition of archetype(s): A set of characters within the psyche which act as the instinct of identification, or categories of identification tendencies. In other words, you did not choose the stereotypical role you played in high school, you don't go "hmmm, i'll be a emo or nerd..." no, an inner force (archetype) drew you instinctively towards identifying with a character. The mold or frame of the archetype can provide a coherence within ones "I am" self definition. my 2 cents :)
mananirvana 1 year ago
The acorn can become an oak, and not a donkey.....oh lord, that's Rich!
serpentineflame 1 year ago
AMAZING!!!!
capkarr 1 year ago
Where do the archetypes come from? In his earlier work, Jung tried to link the archetypes to heredity and regarded them as instinctual. We are born with these patterns which structure our imagination and make it distinctly human. Archetypes are thus very closely linked to our bodies. In his later work, Jung was convinced that the archetypes are psychoid, that is, "they shape matter (nature) as well as mind (psyche)"
mepaleoindian 1 year ago
The etymology of the archtype is within the spirit realm, surrounding us as a kind of parallel universe. I have a link for a chapter in my book at trailopen dot. com It deals with many archtypes I've become or have become entangled (encountered?) on my journey. A dramatic LSD experience long ago when i had to face my own "dissociated" demons or PTSD. This took the form of sexual figures flooding the brain while attempting coitis on a paradise to hell experince.
obiwan1947 1 year ago
I've many books on Jung, and a bit of the Bollinger series. Jung is so insightful. But if you enter a dark room and take a pict of a statue, it's a clear representation of only one view. Hereditary would be impossible to prove. "Instinctual" is closer to the spirit world, which is "naturally" MADE UP of the dynamisms, archtypes, etc. These are also called Principalities and Powers in the Bible.
obiwan1947 1 year ago
@obiwan1947 very clever words.
mikevern69 1 year ago
@obiwan1947 wow :)
joannahewson 9 months ago
@mepaleoindian
Archetypes are learned. ;-) ;-) ;-)
AwesomeChina 1 year ago
This man was right on...
KEGeneration 1 year ago
The DVD, Matter of Heart, is a documentary (BBC, I think) and you can watch it in full right here on YouTube. Got the original RED BOOK in it too.
kstreletzk 2 years ago
got a link?
obiwan1947 2 years ago
Dear Carl,
You are amaizing and very nobel man.The picture of the primal essence of the our life is that thruth,you brought to us that kind of knowledge,the knowledge of soul,the primal essence of human being
with all those bad projections out of that
primal essence....Thank you for....
And....secret of heart....searching through the night of science...right to truth of essence....essence of life
astamis777 2 years ago 6
Agree astamis777! He changed my life and I will never be the same :)
jungian9111 2 years ago
Thanks so much for post it. Wher's possible to buy this dvd?
Miracle67 2 years ago
Normally the ProphetfromTrailopen is not so forgiving. You, Miracle67, have failed to watch the DVD all the way to the end, where the information you see is posted for Amazonian purchase. However, because you are wise enough to recognize the genius of CG, you are forgiven and encouraged to see the last ten seconds or so.
obiwan1947 2 years ago
obiwan1947, you are so patronizing!!! What do you know about Miracle67's wisdom? Nothing....
vinavon 2 years ago
;-)
Miracle67 2 years ago
Brilliant!!!!
noworldorder555 2 years ago
wunderbar! danke!
Miracle67 2 years ago
ehmmm... i think he says "numinous experience" and not "luminous experience" as your text on the video clip suggests, he uses "numinous" often in his writings, but i could be wrong, and i thank you for posting this regardless! excellent material.
mrstimpy 2 years ago
You are correct. I just haven't gotten around to fixing it yet. If you want to see more of CG in "action" re his "luminous use of numinous" you can see his insights in the Britneyzian Prophecies 1-8
Good catch.
obiwan1947 2 years ago
numinous- of a numen; spiritual, awe inspiring.
luminous- to throw light on
h4heather 2 years ago
obiwan1947 this vid is awesome. I have felt both of these feelings.
supreme227 2 years ago 4
Comment removed
bobbles291171 2 years ago
oic
obiwan1947 2 years ago
Comment removed
bobbles291171 2 years ago
Comment removed
bobbles291171 2 years ago
Thank you so much for posting this
melifish 2 years ago
Hi, Obiwan1947, first of all thanks a lot for posting this video, but I was wondering if you could explain to what Jung meant by saying that the girl would be complete, independent when she could "HOLD" that experience. Thanks a lot in advance.
sibalnom 2 years ago
This is one of the best questions I've ever receieved on the web, and I'll start off by saying I can't possibly answer in the 500 characters I'm allowed. When does an "epipheny", a "realization," a "breakthrough occur," and result in life-personality and awareness all growing and re-integrating as a result, and when is it merely a "Oh I see." Some people are so full of "guile" (& sarcasm) that they can hold nothing permanently. I suppose they would be the OPPOSITE of the girl "getting it."
obiwan1947 2 years ago
thanks for posting! where is this from?
RisikoR 3 years ago
In the very last 5 seconds of the video, I text in this is taken from "A Matter of Heart" DVD, available at Amazon, etc; An excellent 107 minute documentary on Dr Jung.
The relevance of Jungian perspective is given throughout the "Britneyzian Prophecy", for the more patient amongst my viewers.
obiwan1947 3 years ago