| |
|
As there's been some discussion of Jung's theories of archetypes on this thread, I thought it might be interesting to discuss his theories in more depth.
Jung divides the psyche into 3 elements ego - the conscious mind, the personal unconscious - everything which one is not presently conscious of (for example, repressed traumas), and the collective unconscious. The collective unconscious is often described in terms of being a "reservoir of our experiences as a species", and according to Jung, we can never be actually conscious of it, except indirectly, through experiences such as deja vu or the recognition of certain symbols or myths, or the cultural parallels found in mythology, folk tales and literature. Jung believed that the collective unconscious was a universal phenomena.
Archetypes
"Archetypes, so far as we can observe and explain them at all, manifest themselves only through their ability to organize images and ideas, and this is always an unconscious process which cannot be detected until afterwards. By assimilating material whose provanance in the phenomenal world is not to be contested, they become visual and psychic."
(Collected Works v8)
Jung identified several archetypes, such as the persona - the public 'face' we present to others; the anima/animus where the anima is the female aspect encountered by men, and animus the male aspect encountered by women; the father - guides/authority figures; the maiden who represents purity and innocence; the trickster - the sacred clown or magician; God that represents the innate human need to comprehend the universe and assign meaning and purpose to events. The hermaphrodite, representing the union of opposites.
According to Jung, Archetypes operate independently of the human mind and humans do not 'create' them but merely receive them. Furthermore, they exist a priori (in a Kantian sense). As far as I know, Jung does not explain in detail how these archetypes arose in the first place.
Jung's notion of the Collective Unconscious has, unsurprisingly, become very popular with modern occultists, probably because it is reminiscient of similar concepts - the Akashic Records of the Theosophists & Edgar Cayce's Book of Life for example. The major difference being that according to Jung, we can only interface with the collective unconscious through archetypes, whilst Theosophists believe that the Akashic Records (which contains a record of everything that has ever happened - and everything that is going to happen) can be tapped into and 'read' by adepts of sufficient ability.
So Jung, prophet, mystic or over-rated? Your thoughts, please. |
|
|
