What do you think?
Rate this book
Jung's Collected Works #11
الدين فى ضوء علم النفس
In this book, Dr. Jung, who has been the author of some of the most provocative hypotheses in modern psychology, describes what he regards as an authentic religious function in the unconscious mind. Using a wealth of material from ancient and medieval gnostic, alchemistic, and occultistic literature, he discusses the religious symbolism of unconscious processes and the possible continuity of religious forms that have appeared and reappeared through the centuries.
115 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1940
200 people are currently reading
7885 people want to read
About the author
C.G. Jung
1,875 books11.5k followersCarl Gustav Jung (/jʊŋ/; German: [ˈkarl ˈɡʊstaf jʊŋ]), often referred to as C. G. Jung, was a Swiss psychiatrist and psychotherapist who founded analytical psychology. Jung proposed and developed the concepts of extraversion and introversion; archetypes, and the collective unconscious. His work has been influential in psychiatry and in the study of religion, philosophy, archeology, anthropology, literature, and related fields. He was a prolific writer, many of whose works were not published until after his death.
The central concept of analytical psychology is individuation—the psychological process of integrating the opposites, including the conscious with the unconscious, while still maintaining their relative autonomy. Jung considered individuation to be the central process of human development.
Jung created some of the best known psychological concepts, including the archetype, the collective unconscious, the complex, and synchronicity. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), a popular psychometric instrument, has been developed from Jung's theory of psychological types.
Though he was a practising clinician and considered himself to be a scientist, much of his life's work was spent exploring tangential areas such as Eastern and Western philosophy, alchemy, astrology, and sociology, as well as literature and the arts. Jung's interest in philosophy and the occult led many to view him as a mystic, although his ambition was to be seen as a man of science. His influence on popular psychology, the "psychologization of religion", spirituality and the New Age movement has been immense.
The central concept of analytical psychology is individuation—the psychological process of integrating the opposites, including the conscious with the unconscious, while still maintaining their relative autonomy. Jung considered individuation to be the central process of human development.
Jung created some of the best known psychological concepts, including the archetype, the collective unconscious, the complex, and synchronicity. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), a popular psychometric instrument, has been developed from Jung's theory of psychological types.
Though he was a practising clinician and considered himself to be a scientist, much of his life's work was spent exploring tangential areas such as Eastern and Western philosophy, alchemy, astrology, and sociology, as well as literature and the arts. Jung's interest in philosophy and the occult led many to view him as a mystic, although his ambition was to be seen as a man of science. His influence on popular psychology, the "psychologization of religion", spirituality and the New Age movement has been immense.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 157 reviews
October 30, 2019
Through a little research I became aware of and interested in Jung's idea of "The Shadow," so I started getting my hands on some of his stuff. "The Shadow" is a part of every human beings personality. It is the other side of us that we shove way deep down inside and hope no one else sees. This concept is related to the idea of "projection." We project onto other people the parts of us that we do not like, or would rather not look at. So when we say, "O my gosh doesn't she look fat in that," we are really saying something like, "I couldn't wear that. I'd probably look fat in that," or, "Wow. She looks good in that, but I would probably look fat wearing that outfit." This is a tough idea to swallow, but I think it is legit. There is a quote in the book that will probably stay with me for life about how much courage it takes a person to look their shadow in the face and deal with it and try to understand it. The whole of your shadow side and the side you show to the world (your unconscious and conscious sides) should ideally be united and equally accepted. Unfortunately, most of us end up walking around like half-people alienating ourselves from the people that remind us of the things we don't like about ourselves. If someone can walk through and accept their own shadows they are on the beginning of an interesting journey of possibly being a full person with more of a full true picture of themselves.
October 14, 2023
The book "Psychology and Religion" by Carl Jung, published by Paidós, is a monumental work that presents the brilliant mind and deep knowledge of one of the most influential thinkers of the 20th century in the field of psychology and religion. This work represents a gem in Jung's bibliography and an invaluable resource for both psychological professionals and those interested in the intersection of spirituality and psychology.
What makes this book exceptional is Jung's ability to explore with depth and clarity the complex and often controversial topics related to psychology and religion. Jung guides us through an intellectual journey that unravels the relationship between psychology and spirituality in a way that is accessible, erudite, and enlightening.
One of the most notable qualities of this work is the way in which Jung integrates his clinical observations and his deep knowledge of psychology with his understanding of religious phenomena. He addresses fundamental issues such as archetypes, the collective unconscious, and complexes, showing how these ideas connect meaningfully to people's religious and spiritual experiences.
The book benefits greatly from Jung's ability to weave a bridge between the secular and the sacred, showing how religious and spiritual beliefs can be understood from a psychological perspective without losing their depth and meaning. Through clear examples and illustrative dreams, Jung demonstrates how religion and spirituality are integral parts of the human experience and can be explored from a psychological perspective without underestimating their importance.
Furthermore, Jung's prose is impeccable, making for an enjoyable and immersive read. Despite the complexity of the topics, the language is clear and accessible, allowing a wide audience to enjoy and understand its content.
In short, Carl Jung's "Psychology and Religion" is a masterpiece that sheds light on the relationship between psychology and spirituality in a way that is profound, insightful, and accessible. This book is an invaluable source of knowledge and essential reading for those wishing to explore the psychological aspects of religion and spirituality. The Paidós publishing house has done a service to the community by publishing this edition in Spanish.
What makes this book exceptional is Jung's ability to explore with depth and clarity the complex and often controversial topics related to psychology and religion. Jung guides us through an intellectual journey that unravels the relationship between psychology and spirituality in a way that is accessible, erudite, and enlightening.
One of the most notable qualities of this work is the way in which Jung integrates his clinical observations and his deep knowledge of psychology with his understanding of religious phenomena. He addresses fundamental issues such as archetypes, the collective unconscious, and complexes, showing how these ideas connect meaningfully to people's religious and spiritual experiences.
The book benefits greatly from Jung's ability to weave a bridge between the secular and the sacred, showing how religious and spiritual beliefs can be understood from a psychological perspective without losing their depth and meaning. Through clear examples and illustrative dreams, Jung demonstrates how religion and spirituality are integral parts of the human experience and can be explored from a psychological perspective without underestimating their importance.
Furthermore, Jung's prose is impeccable, making for an enjoyable and immersive read. Despite the complexity of the topics, the language is clear and accessible, allowing a wide audience to enjoy and understand its content.
In short, Carl Jung's "Psychology and Religion" is a masterpiece that sheds light on the relationship between psychology and spirituality in a way that is profound, insightful, and accessible. This book is an invaluable source of knowledge and essential reading for those wishing to explore the psychological aspects of religion and spirituality. The Paidós publishing house has done a service to the community by publishing this edition in Spanish.
May 5, 2020
Psychology and Religion
(Based on the Terry Lectures Delivered at Yale University)
How many of you have had some strange recurring dreams over a long period of time, where you find yourself at a place which you often see in your dreams but with slight variations from the previous ones and you feel a strong sense of déjà vu about it?
You feel like you have been in this dream before, it looks familiar and there’s always some unusual people or bizarre things happening around that leaves a deep impression on you for days?
Generally in an ordinary dream, we are quite aware of why we see certain images, we can easily correlate it with things that might have caught our attention in a day, often those images form some outlandish story that we wouldn’t otherwise think of but since it’s beyond our control, therefore, it’s likely that they grow out of our unconscious mind with unassailable impulses which reflects our repressed emotions in form of symbols produced by the unconscious mind.
What we don’t know about this is that the recurrence of these dreams has a special meaning and it has the power to affect our mental and emotional state which can be just as dangerous and obnoxious as neurosis and we may become a helpless victim of what then possess us.
That’s when we need a psychologist, in order to truly analyse what’s bothering us, what’s forcing itself on our consciousness that we are unable to grasp. In most cases, these dreams reflect our refusal to come to terms with the existence of some painful psychological conflicts.
Our dreams mirror exactly the underground processes of the psyche, it reveals its unknown inner facts and if we try to understand it, we can literally get to the root of the problem that engulfs us. According to Jung, the psyche is the object and subject of psychology and religious function resides in psyche and is an integral part of human psychology therefore, he tries to solve the psychological conundrum behind his patient’s dream with the help of Christian symbolism to find psychological parallels while also studying the religious aspect of psychical phenomena and he then concludes that religious conviction, particularly if it is deeply rooted, is an excellent defence against an onslaught of the terrible ambiguity of immediate experience and by replacing it by a choice of suitable symbols invested in solidly organized dogma and ritual, we can deal with unaccountable forces of the unconscious mind or if one chooses to call it by God’s grace!
(Based on the Terry Lectures Delivered at Yale University)
How many of you have had some strange recurring dreams over a long period of time, where you find yourself at a place which you often see in your dreams but with slight variations from the previous ones and you feel a strong sense of déjà vu about it?
You feel like you have been in this dream before, it looks familiar and there’s always some unusual people or bizarre things happening around that leaves a deep impression on you for days?
Generally in an ordinary dream, we are quite aware of why we see certain images, we can easily correlate it with things that might have caught our attention in a day, often those images form some outlandish story that we wouldn’t otherwise think of but since it’s beyond our control, therefore, it’s likely that they grow out of our unconscious mind with unassailable impulses which reflects our repressed emotions in form of symbols produced by the unconscious mind.
What we don’t know about this is that the recurrence of these dreams has a special meaning and it has the power to affect our mental and emotional state which can be just as dangerous and obnoxious as neurosis and we may become a helpless victim of what then possess us.
That’s when we need a psychologist, in order to truly analyse what’s bothering us, what’s forcing itself on our consciousness that we are unable to grasp. In most cases, these dreams reflect our refusal to come to terms with the existence of some painful psychological conflicts.
Our dreams mirror exactly the underground processes of the psyche, it reveals its unknown inner facts and if we try to understand it, we can literally get to the root of the problem that engulfs us. According to Jung, the psyche is the object and subject of psychology and religious function resides in psyche and is an integral part of human psychology therefore, he tries to solve the psychological conundrum behind his patient’s dream with the help of Christian symbolism to find psychological parallels while also studying the religious aspect of psychical phenomena and he then concludes that religious conviction, particularly if it is deeply rooted, is an excellent defence against an onslaught of the terrible ambiguity of immediate experience and by replacing it by a choice of suitable symbols invested in solidly organized dogma and ritual, we can deal with unaccountable forces of the unconscious mind or if one chooses to call it by God’s grace!
February 4, 2023
*Español abajo*
Jung shows us from his perspective how religious experiences can be related to the unconscious and how religiosity or mysticism should be an essential part of our lives in order to get rid of the neurosis generated by modern times and rationalism, as well as to have a psyche in optimal conditions. It seems to me a good essay to generate cognitive dissonance with respect to other more rationalist theories such as Freud's, and despite the fact that there are many things in which I do not agree with Jung and the fact that it is very redundant and subjective on several occasions, I think it is a worthwhile reading to help us see not only religion but the psyche from another perspective.
*Español*
Jung nos muestra desde su perspectiva como se pueden relacionar las experiencias religiosas con el inconsciente y como la religiosidad o el misticismo debería de ser parte esencial en nuestras vidas en orden de librarnos de la neurosis generada por los tiempos modernos y el racionalismo, así como para tener una psique en óptimas condiciones. Me parece un buen ensayo para generar disonancia cognitiva respecto a otras teorías más racionalistas como las de Freud, y a pesar de que hay muchas cosas en las que no concuerdo con Jung y a el hecho de ser muy redundante y subjetivo en varias ocasiones, pienso que es una lectura que vale la pena para ayudarnos a ver no sólo a la religión sino la psique desde otra perspectiva.
Jung shows us from his perspective how religious experiences can be related to the unconscious and how religiosity or mysticism should be an essential part of our lives in order to get rid of the neurosis generated by modern times and rationalism, as well as to have a psyche in optimal conditions. It seems to me a good essay to generate cognitive dissonance with respect to other more rationalist theories such as Freud's, and despite the fact that there are many things in which I do not agree with Jung and the fact that it is very redundant and subjective on several occasions, I think it is a worthwhile reading to help us see not only religion but the psyche from another perspective.
*Español*
Jung nos muestra desde su perspectiva como se pueden relacionar las experiencias religiosas con el inconsciente y como la religiosidad o el misticismo debería de ser parte esencial en nuestras vidas en orden de librarnos de la neurosis generada por los tiempos modernos y el racionalismo, así como para tener una psique en óptimas condiciones. Me parece un buen ensayo para generar disonancia cognitiva respecto a otras teorías más racionalistas como las de Freud, y a pesar de que hay muchas cosas en las que no concuerdo con Jung y a el hecho de ser muy redundante y subjetivo en varias ocasiones, pienso que es una lectura que vale la pena para ayudarnos a ver no sólo a la religión sino la psique desde otra perspectiva.
January 29, 2021
N2.2021
იუნგის ინტელექტუალური შესაძლებლობები განსაცვიფრებელია. ბოლო წლებში იუნგის პოზიციები თითქოს განმტკიცდა, დაინტერესებამაც იმატა, მაგრამ ვფიქრობ, ფროიდი მაინც მეინსტრიმად დარჩება. დაე იყოს ასე.
"ის, რომ ღვთაება ჩვენზე ზემოქმედებს, მხოლოდ ფსიქიკის საშუალებით შეიძლება დავადგინოთ, თუმცა ძნელია მივხვდეთ, რა ზემოქმედებს ჩვენზე - ღმერთი თუ არაცნობიერი, ანუ ძნელია, დარწმუნებით ვთქვათ, არის თუ არა ღვთაება და არაცნობიები ორი განსხვავებული სიდიდე. ისინი ტრანსცენდენტური შინაარსისათვის მოსაზღვრე ცნებებია."
N1.2016
მართლაც რამხელა დანაკარგი იქნებოდა ზიგი ფროიდისთვის იუნგის ტიპის უნივერსალური მოაზროვნე. იუნგი ერთადერთი გერმანელი იყო ფროიდის ვენის წრეში და ეს უკანასკნელი ხშირად აღნიშნავდა რამდენად მოხარული იყო და როგორ დიდ მნიშვნელობას ანიჭებდა ამ "იუდეურ-ტევტონურ" თანამშრომლობას. გარკვეულ წრეებში ხშირად შევსწრებივარ კამათს იმის შესახებ - ფროიდი უფრო "მაგარია" თუ იუნგი. ეს საკითხი ალბათ თავისი კომიკურობით ჰგავს კითხვას - სტალონე უფრო მაგარია თუ შვარცენეგერი და ა.შ.
ფაქტი ერთია, იუნგი უფრო ფართო არეალს მოიცავს, უფრო ტევადია, უფრო მძლავრი გონის მქონეა. ფროიდმა საკუთარი ფსიქოანალიზი თავიდანვე ისეთივე იდეოლოგიად აქცია ( როგორც ამას ფოიერაბენდი აღნიშნავს, თუ სწორად მახსოვს), როგორც მარქსიზმი იქცა იდეოლოგიად. ეს აღარაა მეცნიერება, მოშლილია მასში ვერიფიკაცია-ფალსიფიკაციის პრინციპი. ფროიდისა და მარქსიზმისთვის არ არსებობს გამონაკლისი, იდეოლოგია ყოვლის მომცველია, ნებისმიერი ნევროზის უკან დაუკმაყოფილებელი ან გადახრილი სექსუალური ჟინი მყოფობს და ამას არაფერს შველის ხუმრობით ნათქვამი - ხანდახან სიგარა მხოლოდ სიგარაა.
ფროიდმა დაგვიტოვა "ჭეშმარიტება" რომ რელიგია არის მასობრივი ნევროზი (იხ. "ერთი ილუზიის მომავლისათვის" და "კულტურით უკმაყოფილება"), ხოლო რაოდენ უფრო მართებულად სწვდა იუნგი, რომ რელიგიიდან განდგომა იქცა ახალი ტიპის ნევროზად. რელიგიური კედლების მსხვრევა ადამიანური ტრაგედის გაგრძელებაა ( რადგან დასაწყისი ადამისა და ევას არჩევანში უნდა ვეძიოთ), რომელმაც მეოცე საუკუნეში ახალი ელფერი შეიძინა, უფრო მკვეთრი ფორმები მიიღო და როგორ არ აღვნიშნო აღფრთოვანება იმითაც რომ იუნგი მართებულად სწვდა ნიცშეს, როგორც ეპოქის პროფეტს, როგორც ეპოქის განსხეულებულ ბედისწერას. ნიცშე არ იყო ათეისტი, აღნიშნავს იგი, და ღმერთის სიკვდილის შემდეგ, მისი ალტერ ეგო, ზარათუსტრა უნდა განღმრთობილიყო, მაგრამ ადამიანი ვერ განიღმრთო და რომ განიღმრთოს მას ღმერთის ბედისწერა მიეწევა - სიკვდილი. ღმერთის სიკვდილი ფსიქოლოგიურ-გონითი საყრდენის ნგრევაა , რასაც მოჰყვება ადამიანის სიკვდილი. დიონისოს და ქრისტეს ხვედრი მანაც უნდა გაიზიაროს.
იმის მიუხედავად, რომ იუნგი ცდილობს ფილოსოფიას გაემიჯნოს, ეს ფილოსოფიური წიგნია, რომელიც თანამედროვე "საშუა���ო დონის ინტელექტუალს" რაღაცებზე სხვაგვარ მინიშნებებს მისცემს.
ერთი სიტყვით, აგერ იუნგი და "ვისაც ყური აქვს, ისმინოს" :))
იუნგის ინტელექტუალური შესაძლებლობები განსაცვიფრებელია. ბოლო წლებში იუნგის პოზიციები თითქოს განმტკიცდა, დაინტერესებამაც იმატა, მაგრამ ვფიქრობ, ფროიდი მაინც მეინსტრიმად დარჩება. დაე იყოს ასე.
"ის, რომ ღვთაება ჩვენზე ზემოქმედებს, მხოლოდ ფსიქიკის საშუალებით შეიძლება დავადგინოთ, თუმცა ძნელია მივხვდეთ, რა ზემოქმედებს ჩვენზე - ღმერთი თუ არაცნობიერი, ანუ ძნელია, დარწმუნებით ვთქვათ, არის თუ არა ღვთაება და არაცნობიები ორი განსხვავებული სიდიდე. ისინი ტრანსცენდენტური შინაარსისათვის მოსაზღვრე ცნებებია."
N1.2016
მართლაც რამხელა დანაკარგი იქნებოდა ზიგი ფროიდისთვის იუნგის ტიპის უნივერსალური მოაზროვნე. იუნგი ერთადერთი გერმანელი იყო ფროიდის ვენის წრეში და ეს უკანასკნელი ხშირად აღნიშნავდა რამდენად მოხარული იყო და როგორ დიდ მნიშვნელობას ანიჭებდა ამ "იუდეურ-ტევტონურ" თანამშრომლობას. გარკვეულ წრეებში ხშირად შევსწრებივარ კამათს იმის შესახებ - ფროიდი უფრო "მაგარია" თუ იუნგი. ეს საკითხი ალბათ თავისი კომიკურობით ჰგავს კითხვას - სტალონე უფრო მაგარია თუ შვარცენეგერი და ა.შ.
ფაქტი ერთია, იუნგი უფრო ფართო არეალს მოიცავს, უფრო ტევადია, უფრო მძლავრი გონის მქონეა. ფროიდმა საკუთარი ფსიქოანალიზი თავიდანვე ისეთივე იდეოლოგიად აქცია ( როგორც ამას ფოიერაბენდი აღნიშნავს, თუ სწორად მახსოვს), როგორც მარქსიზმი იქცა იდეოლოგიად. ეს აღარაა მეცნიერება, მოშლილია მასში ვერიფიკაცია-ფალსიფიკაციის პრინციპი. ფროიდისა და მარქსიზმისთვის არ არსებობს გამონაკლისი, იდეოლოგია ყოვლის მომცველია, ნებისმიერი ნევროზის უკან დაუკმაყოფილებელი ან გადახრილი სექსუალური ჟინი მყოფობს და ამას არაფერს შველის ხუმრობით ნათქვამი - ხანდახან სიგარა მხოლოდ სიგარაა.
ფროიდმა დაგვიტოვა "ჭეშმარიტება" რომ რელიგია არის მასობრივი ნევროზი (იხ. "ერთი ილუზიის მომავლისათვის" და "კულტურით უკმაყოფილება"), ხოლო რაოდენ უფრო მართებულად სწვდა იუნგი, რომ რელიგიიდან განდგომა იქცა ახალი ტიპის ნევროზად. რელიგიური კედლების მსხვრევა ადამიანური ტრაგედის გაგრძელებაა ( რადგან დასაწყისი ადამისა და ევას არჩევანში უნდა ვეძიოთ), რომელმაც მეოცე საუკუნეში ახალი ელფერი შეიძინა, უფრო მკვეთრი ფორმები მიიღო და როგორ არ აღვნიშნო აღფრთოვანება იმითაც რომ იუნგი მართებულად სწვდა ნიცშეს, როგორც ეპოქის პროფეტს, როგორც ეპოქის განსხეულებულ ბედისწერას. ნიცშე არ იყო ათეისტი, აღნიშნავს იგი, და ღმერთის სიკვდილის შემდეგ, მისი ალტერ ეგო, ზარათუსტრა უნდა განღმრთობილიყო, მაგრამ ადამიანი ვერ განიღმრთო და რომ განიღმრთოს მას ღმერთის ბედისწერა მიეწევა - სიკვდილი. ღმერთის სიკვდილი ფსიქოლოგიურ-გონითი საყრდენის ნგრევაა , რასაც მოჰყვება ადამიანის სიკვდილი. დიონისოს და ქრისტეს ხვედრი მანაც უნდა გაიზიაროს.
იმის მიუხედავად, რომ იუნგი ცდილობს ფილოსოფიას გაემიჯნოს, ეს ფილოსოფიური წიგნია, რომელიც თანამედროვე "საშუა���ო დონის ინტელექტუალს" რაღაცებზე სხვაგვარ მინიშნებებს მისცემს.
ერთი სიტყვით, აგერ იუნგი და "ვისაც ყური აქვს, ისმინოს" :))
January 19, 2023
Jung estuvo en lo correcto. El tipo murió el 6 de junio de 1961, casi 30 años antes de que exista la psicología evolutiva y la ciencia cognitiva de la religión. Sin embargo, él tuvo razón. Hasta hace un par de semanas leí un libro de Mattias Desmet, sobre el totalitarismo, en donde habla mucho sobre el pensamiento mecanicista del hombre actual, en donde absolutamente todo está reducido a interacciones entre los campos y las partículas elementos del modelo estándar; el amor que sientes, el placer de un paisaje, o la conexión con algo, son simplemente impulsos eléctricos, sinapsis, o bioquímica explicada mediante conectores enzimáticos; mucha explicación le quita el significado del símbolo.
Jung esto ya lo veía venir, y se dio cuenta incluso de que el hombre actual, eliminó a su dios y ahora no sabe qué hacer; esto se demuestra mediante estudios en donde por ejemplo, los ateos tienden a ser personas menos alegres, ya que no cuentan con movimientos, agrupaciones, grupos de canto, o de oración, ya que no creen en doctrinas y no necesitan este tipo de comunidades. Sin embargo, la historia evolutiva humana tuvo un papel importante en crear "agrupaciones" mediante diversos sesgos cognitivos y demás elementos, entre ellos, la "religión". Las personas que comparten tiempo en grupos, tienen más niveles de endorfinas, serotonina, entre otros neurotransmisores que elevan el grado de felicidad de estos individuos; el humano es un animal social. Y este es uno de los tantos ejemplos.
Jung pese a que vivió en una época donde la medicina, y la neurociencia estaba totalmente limitada, acierta en diversos momentos con sus aforismos sobre la posición del hombre y la religión como tal. El libro es básicamente una especie de lectura muy parecida a la de "Ficciones" de Jorge Luis Borges, pero escrita por un psicoanalista; la comparación la atribuyo al grado de conocimiento y detalle, Jung era una eminencia, era un almanaque y una enciclopedia, por lo que en algunos momentos puede que le caiga un poco pesado al lector, con tantas referencias, textos de la edad media, de mandalas, entre otras cientos de comentarios hasta en latín, y nada de eso le resta al mensaje.
Jung esto ya lo veía venir, y se dio cuenta incluso de que el hombre actual, eliminó a su dios y ahora no sabe qué hacer; esto se demuestra mediante estudios en donde por ejemplo, los ateos tienden a ser personas menos alegres, ya que no cuentan con movimientos, agrupaciones, grupos de canto, o de oración, ya que no creen en doctrinas y no necesitan este tipo de comunidades. Sin embargo, la historia evolutiva humana tuvo un papel importante en crear "agrupaciones" mediante diversos sesgos cognitivos y demás elementos, entre ellos, la "religión". Las personas que comparten tiempo en grupos, tienen más niveles de endorfinas, serotonina, entre otros neurotransmisores que elevan el grado de felicidad de estos individuos; el humano es un animal social. Y este es uno de los tantos ejemplos.
Jung pese a que vivió en una época donde la medicina, y la neurociencia estaba totalmente limitada, acierta en diversos momentos con sus aforismos sobre la posición del hombre y la religión como tal. El libro es básicamente una especie de lectura muy parecida a la de "Ficciones" de Jorge Luis Borges, pero escrita por un psicoanalista; la comparación la atribuyo al grado de conocimiento y detalle, Jung era una eminencia, era un almanaque y una enciclopedia, por lo que en algunos momentos puede que le caiga un poco pesado al lector, con tantas referencias, textos de la edad media, de mandalas, entre otras cientos de comentarios hasta en latín, y nada de eso le resta al mensaje.
June 26, 2008
"But what is the difference between a real illusion and a healing religious experience? It is merely a difference in words....Nobody can know what the ultimate things are. We must, therefore, take them as we experience them. And if such experience helps make your life healthier, more beautiful, more complete and more satisfactory to yourself and to those who you love, you may safely say: 'This was the grace of God'"
November 16, 2017
یونگ همیشه برای من چهره ای خاص بوده.
با وجود برخی از نظریات شگفت انگیزش گاهی انقدر روانشناسی رو با چیزهای فراطبیعی و معنوی آمیخته که به سختی میشه باورشون کرد.
در این کتاب بیشتر روشهای تعبیر خواب روانکاوانه توسط یونگ ، آداب و مناسک مسیحی و نمادشناسی دستم اومد تا چیزی که میخواستم...!
با وجود برخی از نظریات شگفت انگیزش گاهی انقدر روانشناسی رو با چیزهای فراطبیعی و معنوی آمیخته که به سختی میشه باورشون کرد.
در این کتاب بیشتر روشهای تعبیر خواب روانکاوانه توسط یونگ ، آداب و مناسک مسیحی و نمادشناسی دستم اومد تا چیزی که میخواستم...!
December 21, 2013
Having been exposed to aggressive Christian fundamentalism in high school and to similar variants of Judaism and Islam through the media, "the religions of the book" perplexed me a great deal while growing up. Some mystical traditions made some sense, but the exclusivist revealed religions didn't. Jung, much of whose work dealt with religion, promised early on to offer some handle on the phenomenology of religions.
The framework of the Jungian take on religion is founded upon the idea of biophysical parallelism. Just as the healthy body functions as a dynamic, homeostatic self-regulating system, so too, in his opinion, does the psyche. Distinguishing ideas of god from the unknowable thing itself, a caution inspired by Kant, Jung treated the religious concept as equivalent to what he called the Self, the telos of human wholeness, that is, the balanced realization of psychic potentials--a healthy balance quite naturally sought by everyone. His views, in this very general sense, were taken over by Alcoholics Anonymous, one of whose founders was profoundly influenced by him.
This framework is at least plausible in general, though I never found other archetypes--puer aeternus, anima/us, wise old man etc.--as having quite the universality of the Self and, perhaps, the Shadow--god and the adversary as it were.
The framework of the Jungian take on religion is founded upon the idea of biophysical parallelism. Just as the healthy body functions as a dynamic, homeostatic self-regulating system, so too, in his opinion, does the psyche. Distinguishing ideas of god from the unknowable thing itself, a caution inspired by Kant, Jung treated the religious concept as equivalent to what he called the Self, the telos of human wholeness, that is, the balanced realization of psychic potentials--a healthy balance quite naturally sought by everyone. His views, in this very general sense, were taken over by Alcoholics Anonymous, one of whose founders was profoundly influenced by him.
This framework is at least plausible in general, though I never found other archetypes--puer aeternus, anima/us, wise old man etc.--as having quite the universality of the Self and, perhaps, the Shadow--god and the adversary as it were.
January 2, 2016
Phew! This one was a travail. All right.
The first section of the book is about Western Religion, which is to say, Jesus. Jung has this habit of getting way too hype about Jesus and alchemy, and then prattling in semisensical circles until he hits the end of a chapter, catches his breath, and lapses back into coherence. It is possible I don't care enough about Jesus to properly appreciate these episodes.
I did care about his analysis of the Godhead, and his finally reckoning out what the Holy Spirit is. I was raised Catholic. Have you ever been raised Catholic? Have you ever been a little boy full of weird ideas, deviant impulses, and a tremendous imagination that hungers to comprehend everything, up to and including God? Have you ever asked any question whatsoever to your catechism teachers? In the event you answered "no" to one or more of these questions, let me assure you these people exist only to obfuscate, and also, it is terrible. I've read so heavily on religion that I border on freelance theologian, and up until this book, I've still had no idea what the Holy Spirit is. Carl suggests that God ran the whole creationistic gamut in an effort to express himself in the form of a human, to eventually redeem humanity after balancing out his DID (which Carl tactfully referred to as "antinomy", as God is comprised of a series of contradictions and conflicting beliefs, which I'll explore more when I talk about the Answer to Job.) Yahweh was bowel-clenchingly jealous and insecure back in the Old Testament days, and demanded constant sacrifice and appeasement for his delicate li'l celestial ego. He was also a big fan of genocide upon perceiving an insult. Come New Testament, he took a few steps back, felt bad about the mass slaughter and sadism committed in his halcyon, schizophrenic youth, and decided to redeem everybody by manifesting in the physical form of Jesus the Christ. He did, pissed off the Romans, got tacked up like Christmas tinsel, etc. etc, you know this story. That wasn't just God sacrificing his son, that was God sacrificing himself a la Odin as a means of apology for all the bullshit previously heaped on mankind. The ascension returned him to Heaven, whereupon he will hang out (no pun intended) until the end of days when he will become General Jesus and raise a little Hell. Or banish it, rather, for 1000 years. In the meantime, God is communicating his Godliness into mankind indirectly, via the Holy Spirit, which is sort of like the demiurgic effluvia left over from Creation (initially) and then from the last time God did anything directly (New Testament, potentially Koran). The Godhead can be understood as God the Father, Jesus the Son, and The Holy Spirit the imprecise god-juice that permeates the universe and gives truth to the statement "God is everywhere". Or, for a more modern analogy, God the proton, Jesus the Neutron, and The Holy Spirit the unobservable and theoretical electron cloud surrounding them that actually comprises everything.
Carl talked a lot about making it a quatrain, too, but couldn't seem to be able to decide between Lucifer, Mary, or Sophia. Sophia, for those not well versed in obscure Gnostic conjecture or Biblical euphemism, was potentially the feminine counterpart to Yahweh who was his "daily delight" before the Creation -- contrast with the devil's emanation, Lilith.
The Answer to Job was where we got the psychological profile of Yahweh as uncertain, insecure, dependent, and in constant need of reassurance and approval. His inability to suffer criticism was well established prior, but could no longer be ignored by the innocent Job, a simple shepherd just trying to make it in this workaday world. Lucifer popped up and bet God that Job could be swayed from faith. To prove him wrong, God destroyed Job's life. Killed his flocks, murdered his children, drove his wife away from him, made all his friends turn on him, afflicted him with diseases and sores -- unmade the poor man. Then, taunted him, dared him to critique Him further. Thing is, Job never critiqued him. Jung pulls a handful of quotes from the Bible to help illustrate that Job was a beaten man, grovelling and wormlike, praying for mercy and protection to God FROM the same God, even as this omnipotent maniac had a shouting match with Himself about "WHO'S THE BITCH NOW!" And by Himself, I don't mean a pseudopod thereof, as would've been the case if He had been addressing Lucifer directly since He made Lucifer from Himself, denied him free will, and orchestrated his fall and subsequent antagonism. No, Yahweh yells at no one, as though there were an opponent with any power to challenge him, and projects this on Job, who is cowering in existential terror because everything was already taken from him for no reason and this mad deity still has the damnation card up his sleeve. Job's sycophancy eventually punches through Yahweh's delusional rambling, and He removes the boils and gives him a new wife and flocks. "You'll make new children, they'll be better, in My mercy."
Yeesh.
Carl concludes this 400 page rant with the revelation that God is real, though not in a necessarily Christian sense. He's not real as in a Tall White Sky Man With A Beard Who Will Spank You For Masturbating. He's a phenomenon. God is acknowledged by billions of people, and the thought of Him shapes their behavior. Even if He has no physical form, and never did, he exists as a "psychical event" and, from a psychological perspective, can't be disregarded.
The latter third of the book was about Eastern Religion, and much of it was just Carl checking his privilege about how he can't properly understand the depth of Eastern philosophy and thought, being a European. Still, he was a strong advocate for Zen, which resonated with me. The suggestion was that Eastern vs Western thought could be best summarized with their views of introversion and extraversion. In the West, introversion is frequently viewed as undesirable or maladaptive. Anyone who needs to scamper away, who spurns community to deliberately be a loner, is not to be trusted. Something is wrong, there. They should be out, engaging their peers and the world! In the East, it's seen as the opposite. Those who need the constant chatter of others to cloud their phenomenology are deceiving themselves and filling the void with irrelevant distractions to keep from confronting themselves through honorable contemplation. It's only by looking inward that we can achieve our balance.
I am as Western as they get. I am a big, loud American with a superiority complex and no sense of proportion or moderation. That said, I'm of a mind with the Eastern school of thought. We need to decompress, and to look inward, not necessarily in a spiritual sense but as a means of understanding who and what we really are. If you have doubts vis-à-vis this method's efficacy, refer to the second sentence in this paragraph and then corroborate with the fact I just used fuckin' "vis-à-vis" in an online book review I don't even need to be doing.
The last chapter, Jung talks about the Tao Teh Ching, the book of changes. For the uninitiated, it's basically Chinese tarot cards. You bring a problem or question to the book, you do its little magic trick with a pendulum and it'll point you to one of the pages where you will get a vague answer that will help illuminate and advise your situation. Witchery! Pseudoscientific pap. Sure, sure, sure. Jung did it, and he loved it because it all applied to his situations. At the end he says -- and I paraphrase -- "Anyone with half a brain could step up and say, "Well, Jesus, Carl, of course it seems to apply to your situation, but it's not because it's magic. It's just you projecting your subconscious onto the I Ching." To which I would respond, "Duh! That's sort of the point! I'm a scientist, dude. Think before you talk."
I'll end this with Jung's savage attack on reductionism, which is more or less how he decided to end this giant book:
If [man] is a slave to his quasi-biological credo, he will always try to reduce what he has glimpsed to the banal and the known, to a rationalistic denominator which satisfies only those who are content with illusions. But the foremost of all illusions is that anything can ever satisfy anybody.
That illusion stand behind all that is unendurable in life and in front of all progress, and it is one of the most difficult things to overcome.
The first section of the book is about Western Religion, which is to say, Jesus. Jung has this habit of getting way too hype about Jesus and alchemy, and then prattling in semisensical circles until he hits the end of a chapter, catches his breath, and lapses back into coherence. It is possible I don't care enough about Jesus to properly appreciate these episodes.
I did care about his analysis of the Godhead, and his finally reckoning out what the Holy Spirit is. I was raised Catholic. Have you ever been raised Catholic? Have you ever been a little boy full of weird ideas, deviant impulses, and a tremendous imagination that hungers to comprehend everything, up to and including God? Have you ever asked any question whatsoever to your catechism teachers? In the event you answered "no" to one or more of these questions, let me assure you these people exist only to obfuscate, and also, it is terrible. I've read so heavily on religion that I border on freelance theologian, and up until this book, I've still had no idea what the Holy Spirit is. Carl suggests that God ran the whole creationistic gamut in an effort to express himself in the form of a human, to eventually redeem humanity after balancing out his DID (which Carl tactfully referred to as "antinomy", as God is comprised of a series of contradictions and conflicting beliefs, which I'll explore more when I talk about the Answer to Job.) Yahweh was bowel-clenchingly jealous and insecure back in the Old Testament days, and demanded constant sacrifice and appeasement for his delicate li'l celestial ego. He was also a big fan of genocide upon perceiving an insult. Come New Testament, he took a few steps back, felt bad about the mass slaughter and sadism committed in his halcyon, schizophrenic youth, and decided to redeem everybody by manifesting in the physical form of Jesus the Christ. He did, pissed off the Romans, got tacked up like Christmas tinsel, etc. etc, you know this story. That wasn't just God sacrificing his son, that was God sacrificing himself a la Odin as a means of apology for all the bullshit previously heaped on mankind. The ascension returned him to Heaven, whereupon he will hang out (no pun intended) until the end of days when he will become General Jesus and raise a little Hell. Or banish it, rather, for 1000 years. In the meantime, God is communicating his Godliness into mankind indirectly, via the Holy Spirit, which is sort of like the demiurgic effluvia left over from Creation (initially) and then from the last time God did anything directly (New Testament, potentially Koran). The Godhead can be understood as God the Father, Jesus the Son, and The Holy Spirit the imprecise god-juice that permeates the universe and gives truth to the statement "God is everywhere". Or, for a more modern analogy, God the proton, Jesus the Neutron, and The Holy Spirit the unobservable and theoretical electron cloud surrounding them that actually comprises everything.
Carl talked a lot about making it a quatrain, too, but couldn't seem to be able to decide between Lucifer, Mary, or Sophia. Sophia, for those not well versed in obscure Gnostic conjecture or Biblical euphemism, was potentially the feminine counterpart to Yahweh who was his "daily delight" before the Creation -- contrast with the devil's emanation, Lilith.
The Answer to Job was where we got the psychological profile of Yahweh as uncertain, insecure, dependent, and in constant need of reassurance and approval. His inability to suffer criticism was well established prior, but could no longer be ignored by the innocent Job, a simple shepherd just trying to make it in this workaday world. Lucifer popped up and bet God that Job could be swayed from faith. To prove him wrong, God destroyed Job's life. Killed his flocks, murdered his children, drove his wife away from him, made all his friends turn on him, afflicted him with diseases and sores -- unmade the poor man. Then, taunted him, dared him to critique Him further. Thing is, Job never critiqued him. Jung pulls a handful of quotes from the Bible to help illustrate that Job was a beaten man, grovelling and wormlike, praying for mercy and protection to God FROM the same God, even as this omnipotent maniac had a shouting match with Himself about "WHO'S THE BITCH NOW!" And by Himself, I don't mean a pseudopod thereof, as would've been the case if He had been addressing Lucifer directly since He made Lucifer from Himself, denied him free will, and orchestrated his fall and subsequent antagonism. No, Yahweh yells at no one, as though there were an opponent with any power to challenge him, and projects this on Job, who is cowering in existential terror because everything was already taken from him for no reason and this mad deity still has the damnation card up his sleeve. Job's sycophancy eventually punches through Yahweh's delusional rambling, and He removes the boils and gives him a new wife and flocks. "You'll make new children, they'll be better, in My mercy."
Yeesh.
Carl concludes this 400 page rant with the revelation that God is real, though not in a necessarily Christian sense. He's not real as in a Tall White Sky Man With A Beard Who Will Spank You For Masturbating. He's a phenomenon. God is acknowledged by billions of people, and the thought of Him shapes their behavior. Even if He has no physical form, and never did, he exists as a "psychical event" and, from a psychological perspective, can't be disregarded.
The latter third of the book was about Eastern Religion, and much of it was just Carl checking his privilege about how he can't properly understand the depth of Eastern philosophy and thought, being a European. Still, he was a strong advocate for Zen, which resonated with me. The suggestion was that Eastern vs Western thought could be best summarized with their views of introversion and extraversion. In the West, introversion is frequently viewed as undesirable or maladaptive. Anyone who needs to scamper away, who spurns community to deliberately be a loner, is not to be trusted. Something is wrong, there. They should be out, engaging their peers and the world! In the East, it's seen as the opposite. Those who need the constant chatter of others to cloud their phenomenology are deceiving themselves and filling the void with irrelevant distractions to keep from confronting themselves through honorable contemplation. It's only by looking inward that we can achieve our balance.
I am as Western as they get. I am a big, loud American with a superiority complex and no sense of proportion or moderation. That said, I'm of a mind with the Eastern school of thought. We need to decompress, and to look inward, not necessarily in a spiritual sense but as a means of understanding who and what we really are. If you have doubts vis-à-vis this method's efficacy, refer to the second sentence in this paragraph and then corroborate with the fact I just used fuckin' "vis-à-vis" in an online book review I don't even need to be doing.
The last chapter, Jung talks about the Tao Teh Ching, the book of changes. For the uninitiated, it's basically Chinese tarot cards. You bring a problem or question to the book, you do its little magic trick with a pendulum and it'll point you to one of the pages where you will get a vague answer that will help illuminate and advise your situation. Witchery! Pseudoscientific pap. Sure, sure, sure. Jung did it, and he loved it because it all applied to his situations. At the end he says -- and I paraphrase -- "Anyone with half a brain could step up and say, "Well, Jesus, Carl, of course it seems to apply to your situation, but it's not because it's magic. It's just you projecting your subconscious onto the I Ching." To which I would respond, "Duh! That's sort of the point! I'm a scientist, dude. Think before you talk."
I'll end this with Jung's savage attack on reductionism, which is more or less how he decided to end this giant book:
If [man] is a slave to his quasi-biological credo, he will always try to reduce what he has glimpsed to the banal and the known, to a rationalistic denominator which satisfies only those who are content with illusions. But the foremost of all illusions is that anything can ever satisfy anybody.
That illusion stand behind all that is unendurable in life and in front of all progress, and it is one of the most difficult things to overcome.
September 1, 2021
لو كان كارل يونج مقدمش حاجة لعلم النفس غير نظرية الshadow، فدي لوحدها كفاية إن اسمه يتحط وسط اعظم علماء النفس في التاريخ.
لإنها من وجهة نظري أهم اكتشاف في علم النفس بعد اكتشاف فرويد للعقل اللاواعي ذات نفسه.
فيه قانون مشهور اسمه Parkinson's Law بيقول كل ما دخلك زاد كل ما مصاريفك زادت، فلو مرتبك الف جنيه ومكفينك، بمجرد ما تترقى ومرتبك يبقى 5 آلاف، مصاريفك برده هتزيد من حيث لا تحتسب وغالباً مش هتوفر حاجة.
والتفسير إن كل ما قدرتك زادت على فعل شئ، كل ما امكانية فعلك للشئ تزيد، فلما بقى معاك فلوس زادت قدرتك على انك تصرف اكتر، وطالما زادت قدرتك بتزيد معاها فرص انك تصرف اكتر فعلا.
الباحثين بيحبوا يعمموا القانون ده على كل حاجة، فبالم��ل لو زادت قدرتك على ارتكاب الجرايم، فرصك لارتكاب الجرايم هتزيد هي كمان، لو زادت قدرتك على انك تضرب اللي قدامك (بتدرب ملاكمة مثلا) هتزيد معاها فرصك في انك تتخانق مع خلق الله وهكذا.
ووسط كل ده فجأة طلع علينا كارل يونج يقولنا الكلام ده ممكن يمشي على حاجات كتير، لكن مش على الشر، كل ما قدرتك على ارتكاب الشر ووعيك بيه زادت، كل ما الخير جواك هيزيد مش هيقل!
في الأول النفس بالنسبة ليونج عبارة عن 3 أجزاء: الPersona، الShadow، الEgo.
الPersona هي القناع اللي بتلبسه قدام العالم، الشخصية المسموح لبقية الناس تشوفها وتتقبلها وبتتحدد وفقًا لمتطلبات المجتمع والعادات المسموح بيها.
لفترة طويلة كان علماء النفس بيقولوا إن هو ده انت اصلا، لكن يونج طلع يقول انت مش القناع اللي بتلبسه خوفًا من الرفض، انت مش اسمك ولا وظيفتك ولا هدومك ولا حسابك في البنك، انت أعمق من كده بكتير.
الshadow بقى هو الجزء المظلم من نفسيتك، حيث كل الصفات اللي بتكبتها والرغبات اللي بتخبيها والافكار اللي بتخاف اللي حواليك يعرفوها.
والجانب المظلم ده نتيجة للخوف بيتم كبته ونقله للاواعي، يعني انت نفسك مش دريان بيه ولا تعرف عنه حاجة، لكنه مع ذلك بينعكس في معظم تصرفاتك من غير ما تحس، في خناقات او اوقات غضب أو مواقف صعبة أو في انجذابك لاشخاص وأشياء من غير ما تاخد بالك.
نيتشه مثلاً كان بيقول إننا بنعجب بالشخصيات الشريرة في الروايات والافلام (زي الجوكر مثلا) عشان هما بيمثلوا الجزء الخفي من رغباتنا في تحدي المجتمع وإطلاق الزمام لرغباتنا المكبوتة.
وسبب اعجابنا بالشخصيات دي اننا بنشوف إن عندهم الشجاعة اللي مش عندنا في إظهار الجانب الخفي اللي إحنا بنحاول نخبيه خوفًا من الرفض.
الego بقى عند يونج (مختلف شوية عن فرويد) هو اللي واقف بين البيرسونا والشادو، محتار بين الاتنين، هو العقل الواعي المسؤول عن المشاعر اللي على السطح واللي بيحاول يتحكم في نظرة الإنسان لنفسه وتعريفه ليها بالتوازن بين البيرسونا والشادو.
وعشان كده يونج بينصحنا إننا نبقى واعيين بالشادو بتاعنا ونحفر جواه عشان نكتشف الجانب المظلم والخفي من شخصيتنا.
وبيوعد إن بكده اينعم قدرتنا على ارتكاب الشر هتزيد لكن في نفس الوقت وعينا بالقدرة دي هو الحاجة الوحيدة اللي هتخلينا نتحكم فيها بدل ما يتحكم فينا.
وبالمثل هتدينا القدرة على التعامل مع الشر في العالم واستيعابه، لأننا زي ما هنكون واعيين بالجانب الشرير اللي جوانا وقدرنا نحطه تحت السيطرة، هنكون أيضاً واعيين بالجانب المظلم من الآخرين وقادرين على التعامل معاه.
لإنها من وجهة نظري أهم اكتشاف في علم النفس بعد اكتشاف فرويد للعقل اللاواعي ذات نفسه.
فيه قانون مشهور اسمه Parkinson's Law بيقول كل ما دخلك زاد كل ما مصاريفك زادت، فلو مرتبك الف جنيه ومكفينك، بمجرد ما تترقى ومرتبك يبقى 5 آلاف، مصاريفك برده هتزيد من حيث لا تحتسب وغالباً مش هتوفر حاجة.
والتفسير إن كل ما قدرتك زادت على فعل شئ، كل ما امكانية فعلك للشئ تزيد، فلما بقى معاك فلوس زادت قدرتك على انك تصرف اكتر، وطالما زادت قدرتك بتزيد معاها فرص انك تصرف اكتر فعلا.
الباحثين بيحبوا يعمموا القانون ده على كل حاجة، فبالم��ل لو زادت قدرتك على ارتكاب الجرايم، فرصك لارتكاب الجرايم هتزيد هي كمان، لو زادت قدرتك على انك تضرب اللي قدامك (بتدرب ملاكمة مثلا) هتزيد معاها فرصك في انك تتخانق مع خلق الله وهكذا.
ووسط كل ده فجأة طلع علينا كارل يونج يقولنا الكلام ده ممكن يمشي على حاجات كتير، لكن مش على الشر، كل ما قدرتك على ارتكاب الشر ووعيك بيه زادت، كل ما الخير جواك هيزيد مش هيقل!
في الأول النفس بالنسبة ليونج عبارة عن 3 أجزاء: الPersona، الShadow، الEgo.
الPersona هي القناع اللي بتلبسه قدام العالم، الشخصية المسموح لبقية الناس تشوفها وتتقبلها وبتتحدد وفقًا لمتطلبات المجتمع والعادات المسموح بيها.
لفترة طويلة كان علماء النفس بيقولوا إن هو ده انت اصلا، لكن يونج طلع يقول انت مش القناع اللي بتلبسه خوفًا من الرفض، انت مش اسمك ولا وظيفتك ولا هدومك ولا حسابك في البنك، انت أعمق من كده بكتير.
الshadow بقى هو الجزء المظلم من نفسيتك، حيث كل الصفات اللي بتكبتها والرغبات اللي بتخبيها والافكار اللي بتخاف اللي حواليك يعرفوها.
والجانب المظلم ده نتيجة للخوف بيتم كبته ونقله للاواعي، يعني انت نفسك مش دريان بيه ولا تعرف عنه حاجة، لكنه مع ذلك بينعكس في معظم تصرفاتك من غير ما تحس، في خناقات او اوقات غضب أو مواقف صعبة أو في انجذابك لاشخاص وأشياء من غير ما تاخد بالك.
نيتشه مثلاً كان بيقول إننا بنعجب بالشخصيات الشريرة في الروايات والافلام (زي الجوكر مثلا) عشان هما بيمثلوا الجزء الخفي من رغباتنا في تحدي المجتمع وإطلاق الزمام لرغباتنا المكبوتة.
وسبب اعجابنا بالشخصيات دي اننا بنشوف إن عندهم الشجاعة اللي مش عندنا في إظهار الجانب الخفي اللي إحنا بنحاول نخبيه خوفًا من الرفض.
الego بقى عند يونج (مختلف شوية عن فرويد) هو اللي واقف بين البيرسونا والشادو، محتار بين الاتنين، هو العقل الواعي المسؤول عن المشاعر اللي على السطح واللي بيحاول يتحكم في نظرة الإنسان لنفسه وتعريفه ليها بالتوازن بين البيرسونا والشادو.
وعشان كده يونج بينصحنا إننا نبقى واعيين بالشادو بتاعنا ونحفر جواه عشان نكتشف الجانب المظلم والخفي من شخصيتنا.
وبيوعد إن بكده اينعم قدرتنا على ارتكاب الشر هتزيد لكن في نفس الوقت وعينا بالقدرة دي هو الحاجة الوحيدة اللي هتخلينا نتحكم فيها بدل ما يتحكم فينا.
وبالمثل هتدينا القدرة على التعامل مع الشر في العالم واستيعابه، لأننا زي ما هنكون واعيين بالجانب الشرير اللي جوانا وقدرنا نحطه تحت السيطرة، هنكون أيضاً واعيين بالجانب المظلم من الآخرين وقادرين على التعامل معاه.
March 24, 2016
სასწაულია როგორ მოახდინა ამ კაცმა ამდენი რამის ერთმანეთთან დაკავშირება, გააზრება და ფსიქოლოგიურ პროდუქტად გარდაქმა.
თარგმანი ძალიან კარგია.
იუნგიმ "პასუხი იობს", 76 წლის ასაკში დაწერა. ტექსტში ის ხშირად აღნიშნავს, რომ იმყოფება ვარაუდების დონეზე, ზოგიერთი საკითხი კი მისთვისაც სრულიად ბუნდოვანი და გაურკვეველია, მაგრამ მიუხედავად ამისა, გაკვირვებას და აღფთოვანებას იწვევეს, მკვლევარის გულწრფელობა და ანალიზი, თუ როგორ აკავშირებს ერთმანეთთან მთელი ძველი და ახალი აღთქმის მისტერიას და ცდილობს ადამიანის დახმარებას.
ვფიქრობ, ეს ნაშრომი ყველა იმან უნდა წაიკითხოს ვისაც საკუთარი თავის შეცნობის გამოცდილება აქვს, რამდენიმე სიტყვით ტექსტის დედააზრი კი შემდეგშია: "ის, ვინც ღმერთს შეიცნობს, მასზე გავლენას ახდენს კიდეც. იობის დაღუპვის მცდელობამ კრახი განიცადა. შედეგად იაჰვე გარდაიქმნა".
ვრცლად: http://popularpopcorn.blogspot.com/20...
თარგმანი ძალიან კარგია.
იუნგიმ "პასუხი იობს", 76 წლის ასაკში დაწერა. ტექსტში ის ხშირად აღნიშნავს, რომ იმყოფება ვარაუდების დონეზე, ზოგიერთი საკითხი კი მისთვისაც სრულიად ბუნდოვანი და გაურკვეველია, მაგრამ მიუხედავად ამისა, გაკვირვებას და აღფთოვანებას იწვევეს, მკვლევარის გულწრფელობა და ანალიზი, თუ როგორ აკავშირებს ერთმანეთთან მთელი ძველი და ახალი აღთქმის მისტერიას და ცდილობს ადამიანის დახმარებას.
ვფიქრობ, ეს ნაშრომი ყველა იმან უნდა წაიკითხოს ვისაც საკუთარი თავის შეცნობის გამოცდილება აქვს, რამდენიმე სიტყვით ტექსტის დედააზრი კი შემდეგშია: "ის, ვინც ღმერთს შეიცნობს, მასზე გავლენას ახდენს კიდეც. იობის დაღუპვის მცდელობამ კრახი განიცადა. შედეგად იაჰვე გარდაიქმნა".
ვრცლად: http://popularpopcorn.blogspot.com/20...
March 26, 2022
“Ne yazık ki, insanoğlu, bir bütün olarak bakıldığında, düşündüğünden ya da istediğinden daha az iyidir.”
May 1, 2020
'As a matter of fact the only form of existence we know of immediately is psychic. We might well say, on the contrary, that physical existence is merely an interference, since we know of matter only in so far as we perceive psychic images transmitted by the senses.'
Part I talks about the unconscious mind and religion. When we move from religion to science, lack of wisdom and introspection can ruin a person's psyche.
In Part II, Jung talks about how beliefs and ideas can be passed on through a collective consciousness of sorts. He examines a patient's dream and explains symbolism in it. (I definitely need to read more introductory works of his to understand this)
'Nobody can know what the ultimate things are. We must, therefore, take them as we experience them.'
In Part III, Jung explains the limitations of science and where religion fits in. As long as it helps the lives of those with faith, he asks people to readily embrace it although science suggests otherwise, as he claims it to be a decision 'between the devil and the deep blue sea', and urges to pay attention to our immediate experiences.
Part I talks about the unconscious mind and religion. When we move from religion to science, lack of wisdom and introspection can ruin a person's psyche.
In Part II, Jung talks about how beliefs and ideas can be passed on through a collective consciousness of sorts. He examines a patient's dream and explains symbolism in it. (I definitely need to read more introductory works of his to understand this)
'Nobody can know what the ultimate things are. We must, therefore, take them as we experience them.'
In Part III, Jung explains the limitations of science and where religion fits in. As long as it helps the lives of those with faith, he asks people to readily embrace it although science suggests otherwise, as he claims it to be a decision 'between the devil and the deep blue sea', and urges to pay attention to our immediate experiences.
December 16, 2022
بعد از خوندن سه کتاب از یونگ به نظرم آب من و اون توی یه جوب نمیره.از یه جایی به بعد سوال اصلی برام این بود که چرا یونگ همچین حرفهایی زده که به نظرم خوندن اون کتاب بیوگرافیاش ایدهی خوبی میده. یونگ بشر زمان خودش رو دچار بحران میبینه. کشتارهای گسترده در جنگهای جهانی اون رو بدبین کرده به آیندهی بشر و اون راه حل رو در بازگشت به سنتهای گذشته و توجه به اون ناخودآگاهی میدونه که در ادوار مختلف تاریخ بشر جلوههای فرافردی خودش رو نشون داده. از دید یونگ ناخودآگاه الزاما مثبت نیست و میتونه شیطانی و دهشتناک باشه. دعوتش به تسلیم و ارتباط با ناخودآگاه و سنت مذهبی برخواسته از اون هست.
ولی توی این مسیر یونگ در اوهام خودش غرق میشه و اون قدر جذب کیمیاگری و دیدن معنا در فرای ظاهر میشه که انگار داری متن عرفانی و کیمیاگری میخونی. مثلا یه قسمت خوبی از کتاب داره در مورد خاصیت عدد ۴ حرف میزنه.
خلاصه خدانگهدار یونگ عزیز موفق باشی
ولی توی این مسیر یونگ در اوهام خودش غرق میشه و اون قدر جذب کیمیاگری و دیدن معنا در فرای ظاهر میشه که انگار داری متن عرفانی و کیمیاگری میخونی. مثلا یه قسمت خوبی از کتاب داره در مورد خاصیت عدد ۴ حرف میزنه.
خلاصه خدانگهدار یونگ عزیز موفق باشی
March 7, 2016
ასეთი არაჩვეულებრივი ლექცია.
და ასეთი შესანიშნავი თარგმანი.
და ასეთი კარგი მკითხველიც, - ბარემ :))
და ასეთი შესანიშნავი თარგმანი.
და ასეთი კარგი მკითხველიც, - ბარემ :))
September 12, 2009
This collection of three lectures given by Carl Jung in 1937 presents an early version of his mature view on the role of the unconscious in formulating religious symbols. The three foci of this book are a case study of a neurotic man plagued by irrational fears of cancer, a natural history of the generation of religious symbols, and a consideration of the psychological consequences of the crisis of faith that was striking the heart of Europe.
Jung's case study is absolutely fascinating -- he presents and interprets a small number of the patient's dreams and relates them to the symbolic literature of the Gnostics, Hermetics, and Alchemists, three of Jung's favorite symbolic modalities. It's extraordinary to see a modern man completely disinterested in religion or esoterica unwittingly produce symbols that clearly serve the same psychological function as similar images in these somewhat obscure traditions.
His social analysis is crude and in my eyes profoundly misguided. Jung waxes nostalgic for a medieval Europe governed by the Catholic church in which the common folk could assimilate the transpersonal symbolic structures of the ecclesiastical matrix as a bulwark against the intrusion of the unconscious into their daily lives. He polemicizes in a most disagreeable fashion against the Protestant church and blasts the Utopian fantasies of Communism.
In his odious analysis Jung shows himself to be completely disinterested in, and probably ignorant of, the economic or material realities that govern man's existence. There is no sense that liberation from theocratic regimes produced a commensurate reduction of the degree to which the great majority of people were ruthlessly exploited by the great minority.
Perhaps Jung can be forgiven for making a classic error of Modernism and nostalgically aggrandizing a great old Europe that never was. The tenor and focus of his occasional social critiques was dramatically different post World War II, when his primary concern rightly shifted to the conditions of nationalistic totalitarianism. But as they stand in this work his social views are repugnant and anachronistic, and lack all sense of self-awareness.
One additional quarrel I have is that Jung's protestations that he is not interested in theology and philosophy, and that he deals with religious images purely as a psychological phenomenon, are not persuasive in the face of the many metaphysical claims that he in fact makes, such as offhandedly referring to atheism as a "stupid error". Few readers will agree that he has no particular religious convictions of his own, or that they don't absolutely play a core role in shaping his scientific theories.
Despite these problems the book on the whole provides a powerful and persuasive argument that he carefully builds to a gripping crescendo. His consideration of mandala symbolism in the last lecture is absolutely riveting and offers a vital empirical glimpse at the state of the religious mind in modernity.
Jung's case study is absolutely fascinating -- he presents and interprets a small number of the patient's dreams and relates them to the symbolic literature of the Gnostics, Hermetics, and Alchemists, three of Jung's favorite symbolic modalities. It's extraordinary to see a modern man completely disinterested in religion or esoterica unwittingly produce symbols that clearly serve the same psychological function as similar images in these somewhat obscure traditions.
His social analysis is crude and in my eyes profoundly misguided. Jung waxes nostalgic for a medieval Europe governed by the Catholic church in which the common folk could assimilate the transpersonal symbolic structures of the ecclesiastical matrix as a bulwark against the intrusion of the unconscious into their daily lives. He polemicizes in a most disagreeable fashion against the Protestant church and blasts the Utopian fantasies of Communism.
In his odious analysis Jung shows himself to be completely disinterested in, and probably ignorant of, the economic or material realities that govern man's existence. There is no sense that liberation from theocratic regimes produced a commensurate reduction of the degree to which the great majority of people were ruthlessly exploited by the great minority.
Perhaps Jung can be forgiven for making a classic error of Modernism and nostalgically aggrandizing a great old Europe that never was. The tenor and focus of his occasional social critiques was dramatically different post World War II, when his primary concern rightly shifted to the conditions of nationalistic totalitarianism. But as they stand in this work his social views are repugnant and anachronistic, and lack all sense of self-awareness.
One additional quarrel I have is that Jung's protestations that he is not interested in theology and philosophy, and that he deals with religious images purely as a psychological phenomenon, are not persuasive in the face of the many metaphysical claims that he in fact makes, such as offhandedly referring to atheism as a "stupid error". Few readers will agree that he has no particular religious convictions of his own, or that they don't absolutely play a core role in shaping his scientific theories.
Despite these problems the book on the whole provides a powerful and persuasive argument that he carefully builds to a gripping crescendo. His consideration of mandala symbolism in the last lecture is absolutely riveting and offers a vital empirical glimpse at the state of the religious mind in modernity.
January 26, 2019
یونگ در دستگاه روانشناسی خود که مبتنی بر پژوهش تجربی است، میکوشد که پدیدههای گوناگونی را که به انسان مربوطند، و از جمله دین را بر بنیاد شیوههای علمی بررسی کند و از توسل به هرگونه ملاحظات فوق طبیعی یا فلسفی بپرهیزد. او در تبیین مفهومها و اعمال دینی پای فعالیت خلاق ضمیرناخودآگاه را به میان میآورد و در عین حال دین رامحصول حالت مراقبه و تذکر و توجه دقیق به بعضی عوامل موثری میداند که انسان عنوان قدرت قاهر را به آن اطلاق میکند.
حتی اگر مرضِ روانی مبنایی جز توهم نداشته باشد، از واقعیت آن چیزی کم نمیشود. اگر کسی در خیال خود مرا بدترین دشمن خود بداند و مرا بکشد، این کار صرفاً خیالی، بر مردن من بی تأثیر است. توّهمات وجود دارندو ضرر و خطر آنها عیناً مثل حالت جسمانی است. حتی به عقیدهی من اختلالات روانی به مراتب از بیماریهای همهگیر و از زلزله خطرناکترند. حتّی امراض طاعون و آبله در قرون وسطا آنقدر تلفات ندادند که در سال ۱۹۱۴ از بروز بعضی اختلاف عقیدهها، یا بعد از آن تاریخ بر اثر بعضی هدفهای سیاسی بهوقوع پیوست.
یونگ اعتقاد دارد که گذشتگان در عالم ناخودآگاه بسیار تأثیرگذار هستند حتی اگر انسان امروزی هیچ نظری در مورد اعتقادات گذشتگان نداشته باشد باز هم آن باورها در ناخودآگاهش ثبت شدهاند.
جامعه معمولاً در مورد گناهکارانی که به گناه خود واقف نیستند سختگیری نمیکند. اما طبیعت بههیچوجه چنین ارفاقی را به گناهکاران ناخودآگاه روا نمیدارد، بلکه آنها را بههمان شدت مجازات میکند که گویی تعمداً مرتکب خطا شدهاند.
حتی اگر مرضِ روانی مبنایی جز توهم نداشته باشد، از واقعیت آن چیزی کم نمیشود. اگر کسی در خیال خود مرا بدترین دشمن خود بداند و مرا بکشد، این کار صرفاً خیالی، بر مردن من بی تأثیر است. توّهمات وجود دارندو ضرر و خطر آنها عیناً مثل حالت جسمانی است. حتی به عقیدهی من اختلالات روانی به مراتب از بیماریهای همهگیر و از زلزله خطرناکترند. حتّی امراض طاعون و آبله در قرون وسطا آنقدر تلفات ندادند که در سال ۱۹۱۴ از بروز بعضی اختلاف عقیدهها، یا بعد از آن تاریخ بر اثر بعضی هدفهای سیاسی بهوقوع پیوست.
یونگ اعتقاد دارد که گذشتگان در عالم ناخودآگاه بسیار تأثیرگذار هستند حتی اگر انسان امروزی هیچ نظری در مورد اعتقادات گذشتگان نداشته باشد باز هم آن باورها در ناخودآگاهش ثبت شدهاند.
جامعه معمولاً در مورد گناهکارانی که به گناه خود واقف نیستند سختگیری نمیکند. اما طبیعت بههیچوجه چنین ارفاقی را به گناهکاران ناخودآگاه روا نمیدارد، بلکه آنها را بههمان شدت مجازات میکند که گویی تعمداً مرتکب خطا شدهاند.
October 4, 2014
ამ წიგნში იმდენი საინტერესო აზრი და ქცევის ანალიზია საიდან დავიწყო არ ვიცი. არც ის ვიცი რა გამოვყო, იმდენი აზრი მომდის თავში რომ review-ს დაწერა მიძნელდება.
იძულებული ვარ ძალიან ზერელედ აღვნიშნო ჩემთვის საინტერესო ასპექტების მხოლოდ რამდენიმე მაგალითი: იობის და იაჰვეს ურთიერთობის ანალიზი, ღმერთის განკაცების მიზეზები, მისი გარდაქმნა, სატანის და იაჰვეს ფსიქოლოგიური პორტრეტი, ცნობიერის და არაცნობიერის მოქმედება. (განსაკუთრებით არაცნობიერი)
ასევე ფსიქოლოგია და რელიგიაში ძალიან საინტერესოა პაციენტის რელიგიური სიმბოლიზმით დატვირთული სიზმრები და მათი ახსნა.
ცოტა უცნაურია იუნგის აზრი იმის თაობაზე რომ სხვადასხვა ეპოქაში შექმნილი სხვადასხვა სიმბოლოები და სურათ-ხატები ხვდება თანამედროვე ადამიანის არაცნობიერში, ისე რომ ცნობიერად ადამიანს მათ შესახებ შესაძლოა არაფერი გაუგია, იუნგი უშვებს რომ რადგან ეს სიმბოლოები და სურათ-ხატები ორი ათასწლეულის მანძილზე ვლინდებოდა სხვადასხვა ადამიანის არაცნობიერში, არსებობს ალბათ არაცნობიერის მდგომარეობის მემკვიდრეობით გადაეცემის შესაძლებლობა. მდგომარეობა რომელიც მსგავს სიმბოლოებს ქმნის და აკავშირებს.
ძალიან საინტერესოა მთელი ეს სურათ-ხატები და სიმბოლიზმიც რომელშიც ცოტა არ იყოს ავიხლართე.
იძულებული ვარ ძალიან ზერელედ აღვნიშნო ჩემთვის საინტერესო ასპექტების მხოლოდ რამდენიმე მაგალითი: იობის და იაჰვეს ურთიერთობის ანალიზი, ღმერთის განკაცების მიზეზები, მისი გარდაქმნა, სატანის და იაჰვეს ფსიქოლოგიური პორტრეტი, ცნობიერის და არაცნობიერის მოქმედება. (განსაკუთრებით არაცნობიერი)
ასევე ფსიქოლოგია და რელიგიაში ძალიან საინტერესოა პაციენტის რელიგიური სიმბოლიზმით დატვირთული სიზმრები და მათი ახსნა.
ცოტა უცნაურია იუნგის აზრი იმის თაობაზე რომ სხვადასხვა ეპოქაში შექმნილი სხვადასხვა სიმბოლოები და სურათ-ხატები ხვდება თანამედროვე ადამიანის არაცნობიერში, ისე რომ ცნობიერად ადამიანს მათ შესახებ შესაძლოა არაფერი გაუგია, იუნგი უშვებს რომ რადგან ეს სიმბოლოები და სურათ-ხატები ორი ათასწლეულის მანძილზე ვლინდებოდა სხვადასხვა ადამიანის არაცნობიერში, არსებობს ალბათ არაცნობიერის მდგომარეობის მემკვიდრეობით გადაეცემის შესაძლებლობა. მდგომარეობა რომელიც მსგავს სიმბოლოებს ქმნის და აკავშირებს.
ძალიან საინტერესოა მთელი ეს სურათ-ხატები და სიმბოლიზმიც რომელშიც ცოტა არ იყოს ავიხლართე.
March 24, 2017
يتناول يونغ في هذا الكتاب تجربته في تحليل وتفسير احلام احدى مرضاه الذين لا يؤمنون او يعترفون بالأديان بل يؤمنون بكل ما اخرجه العلم، ليكتشف ان خافية هذا النوع من الاشخاص تظهر في احلامهم عندما تفسر تفسيرا نفسيا صحيحا، وفي هذه الخافية جزء من خبرتهم الدينية، كما أسماها.
ظننت قبل البدء بقراءة هذا الكتاب أنني سأجد معلومات اكثر عن علاقة الدين بعلم النفس لكنني لم اجد ما كنت انشده، الا ان المعلومات المذكورة في هذا الكتاب كافية لشخص مبتدئ في علم النفس ومن الواضح ان يونغ بذل جهدا كبيرا ليستخلص تلك المعلومات.
وكما في معظم كتبه يتطرق يونغ الى الموضوع الاساسي عبر طرح تجارب متنوعة في العلاج النفسي مايجعل كتبه اكثر متعة.
ظننت قبل البدء بقراءة هذا الكتاب أنني سأجد معلومات اكثر عن علاقة الدين بعلم النفس لكنني لم اجد ما كنت انشده، الا ان المعلومات المذكورة في هذا الكتاب كافية لشخص مبتدئ في علم النفس ومن الواضح ان يونغ بذل جهدا كبيرا ليستخلص تلك المعلومات.
وكما في معظم كتبه يتطرق يونغ الى الموضوع الاساسي عبر طرح تجارب متنوعة في العلاج النفسي مايجعل كتبه اكثر متعة.
Want to read
August 5, 2011Jung says, "The soul is for the most part outside the body." What an extraordinary idea! The modern person is taught to believe that the soul - or whatever language is used for soul - is contained in the brain or is equivalent to mind and is purely and humanly subjective. But if we were to think of the soul as being in the world, then maybe our work would be seen as a truly important aspect of our lives, not only for its literal product but also as a way of caring for the soul. - #CareoftheSoul #Thomas Moore
September 22, 2014
بین 3 و 4 شک داشتم. خب فهمیدم که یونگ رو دوست دارم واقعاً. ولی مشکلِ همیشگی رو دارم با تحلیل هاش. فکر می کنم یک جور خاصیّت خود-تأییدکنندگی دارن. یعنی انگار به صورت هدفمند از قبل انتخاب کرده که کجا دنبالِ مدرک بگرده. از طرفی بنابر تعریف خودش از دین(دین عبارت از رابطه ی انسان است با عالی ترین یا تواناترین ارزش) این توقّع برام ایجاد شده بود که انقدر به مسیحیّت گیر نده که اینطور نبود متأسّفانه.
Read
December 25, 2022نمیتونم به این کتاب امتیاز بدم، ارتباط نگرفتم با کتاب و بنظرم کمتر به روانشناسی و بیشتر به جادوگری و روابط اعداد فرای ظاهر و اینا میپردازه... چندتا خواب از بیمارانش هم تعریف میکنه و به تفسیر اونا میپردازه که برای کسی که چهارچوب فکری یونگ رو پذیرفته قابل درکه وگرنه بیشتر داستانسرایی بنظر میاد.
من این کتاب رو تو کتابخونه قدیمی داییم پیدا کرده بودم و بابت عنوانش خیلی علاقهمند بودم بخونمش، ولی الان به هیچکس پیشنهادش نمیکنم.
من این کتاب رو تو کتابخونه قدیمی داییم پیدا کرده بودم و بابت عنوانش خیلی علاقهمند بودم بخونمش، ولی الان به هیچکس پیشنهادش نمیکنم.
January 19, 2024
min første inngang til å forstå hva jung egentlig mener med arketyper. spennende forelesninger om symboler forstått som en del av det (felles) ubevisste. litt vanskelig å henge med til tider, mye for meg veldig ukjent fra antikken, alkymi, middelalder og gammel kristendom, maaaange antikke navn og siteringer - men veldig interessant og jeg følger ham. det samlet seg. led meg videre🫡
November 23, 2019
Jung writes in a way that makes his ideas palatable and as they stick with you, digestible. That is not to say that I agree with all of his analyses, but I do enjoy reading and pondering his work.
May 3, 2021
I value Jung’s work greatly as he is essentially the forefather of a field of thought I am very interested in.
I read this book a few months deep into researching the psychological, anthropological and biological components of religious cognition and behaviour. As such, I am not sure if this book actually provided little insight or if I had just read it at the wrong time in my studies and the concepts were too familiar to be of use.
Being Jung, dreams are discussed to excess despite not being the intended focus of the book. While I am excessively passionate about dreams I was a little disappointed by this as I felt it took up space that could have been put to better use especially given how many other books he has dedicated to dreams and symbolism.
I think Jung was ESSENTIAL to getting the ball rolling on these ideas but that modern research has come a long way in building from these initial intuitions. Thus, I wouldn’t recommend this to someone trying to learn about the psychology of religion. I would, however, recommend this to someone interested in the history of this field of research.
I read this book a few months deep into researching the psychological, anthropological and biological components of religious cognition and behaviour. As such, I am not sure if this book actually provided little insight or if I had just read it at the wrong time in my studies and the concepts were too familiar to be of use.
Being Jung, dreams are discussed to excess despite not being the intended focus of the book. While I am excessively passionate about dreams I was a little disappointed by this as I felt it took up space that could have been put to better use especially given how many other books he has dedicated to dreams and symbolism.
I think Jung was ESSENTIAL to getting the ball rolling on these ideas but that modern research has come a long way in building from these initial intuitions. Thus, I wouldn’t recommend this to someone trying to learn about the psychology of religion. I would, however, recommend this to someone interested in the history of this field of research.
October 28, 2020
The best Jung I’ve read to date. Fun to read and with some actual laughs thrown in here and there. LOVE U GUSTAV
April 16, 2018
Pek de ilgimi çekeceğini sanmadığım kitaptı fakat sonunda "iyi ki okunuşum" dedirtti. C.G. Jung mantıklı adam vesselam.
"Karşımızdakine akıl ve sağduyu çerçevesinde davranmayı öğütlemek kuşkusuz güzel bir şeydir, ancak dinleyicimiz ya tımarhanelik bir deliyse ya da kolektiflik duygusuna kapılmış bir kalabalıksa ne olacak? İkisi arasında pek fark yoktur, çünkü hem deliyi hem de güruhu harekete geçiren, kişisel olmayan, kişiyi ezen ve güçlerdir."
"Ahlaklı olma, tıpkı zeka gibi, bir hediyeye benzer."
"Savaş çıktığı sırada, dünyanın akılcı araçlarca düzeltilebileceğinden son derece emindik. Şimdi ise, eski teokrasi savını , yani totaliter rejim savını ileri süren devletleri şaşkınlıkla seyrediyoruz; bu sav kaçınılmaz şekilde, özgür düşüncenin baskı altına alınmasını da beraberinde getirmektedir. Şimdilerde, yine insanların, yeryüzünde cenneti nasıl yaratacakları konusundaki çocukça teorilerini desteklemek amacıyla, birbirinin boğazına sarıldığını görüyoruz. Daha önceleri az çok başarılı şekilde birbirine bağlı olan ve devasa bir zihinsel binada işe yarar hale getirilen ve alt dünyaya ait güçlerin şimdi, herhangi bir akılsal ve ruhsal çekicilikten yoksun bir Devlet köleliği ve Devlet hapishanesi yarattıklarını veya yaratmaya çalıştıklarını görmek çok zor değildir."
"Karşımızdakine akıl ve sağduyu çerçevesinde davranmayı öğütlemek kuşkusuz güzel bir şeydir, ancak dinleyicimiz ya tımarhanelik bir deliyse ya da kolektiflik duygusuna kapılmış bir kalabalıksa ne olacak? İkisi arasında pek fark yoktur, çünkü hem deliyi hem de güruhu harekete geçiren, kişisel olmayan, kişiyi ezen ve güçlerdir."
"Ahlaklı olma, tıpkı zeka gibi, bir hediyeye benzer."
"Savaş çıktığı sırada, dünyanın akılcı araçlarca düzeltilebileceğinden son derece emindik. Şimdi ise, eski teokrasi savını , yani totaliter rejim savını ileri süren devletleri şaşkınlıkla seyrediyoruz; bu sav kaçınılmaz şekilde, özgür düşüncenin baskı altına alınmasını da beraberinde getirmektedir. Şimdilerde, yine insanların, yeryüzünde cenneti nasıl yaratacakları konusundaki çocukça teorilerini desteklemek amacıyla, birbirinin boğazına sarıldığını görüyoruz. Daha önceleri az çok başarılı şekilde birbirine bağlı olan ve devasa bir zihinsel binada işe yarar hale getirilen ve alt dünyaya ait güçlerin şimdi, herhangi bir akılsal ve ruhsal çekicilikten yoksun bir Devlet köleliği ve Devlet hapishanesi yarattıklarını veya yaratmaya çalıştıklarını görmek çok zor değildir."
January 12, 2017
Carl Jung's conference on the religious experience inside the realms of clinical psychology. El primer capítulo trata sobre cómo el fenómeno religioso es abordado en la clínica.En el segundo, defiende la función del inconsciente y sus contenidos para explicar dicha experiencia, y el tercero, describe los elementos religiosos desde su psicología analítica.
Over all, I value his pragmatism: Psychologists do not need to judge if religion is good or bad, if someone's belief is apt or not. A psychologist needs to identify what is behind the religious experience and how is it influencing in a person's functioning. Anything other than that, attacks domains out of its scope.
Over all, I value his pragmatism: Psychologists do not need to judge if religion is good or bad, if someone's belief is apt or not. A psychologist needs to identify what is behind the religious experience and how is it influencing in a person's functioning. Anything other than that, attacks domains out of its scope.
February 9, 2020
I was so mind-blown by the level of artistry, beauty, and insight in Jung's writing that I decided not to read all of his other works at once (despite an overwhelming urge to), but to ration them over the rest of my life, lest I never find an author who quite resonates with my mind and soul the way he did. This book is not an apology for religion, far from it, and it is unfortunate that Jungian thought has been wrongly popularised as some sort of pseudo-spiritual fad. This book is an incredibly insightful, psychoanalytical foray into subjective religious experience and what role it has historically played in the constitution of the human mind.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 157 reviews