What do you think?
Rate this book
By Jung, Carl Gustav The Undiscovered Self (Routledge Great Minds) Paperback - July 2013
One of the world's greatest psychiatrists reveals how to embrace our own humanity and resist the pressures of an ever-changing world.
In this challenging and provocative work, Dr. Carl Jung—one of history's greatest minds—argues that civilization's future depends on our ability as individuals to resist the collective forces of society. Only by gaining an awareness and understanding of one's unconscious mind and true, inner nature—"the undiscovered self"—can we as individuals acquire the self-knowledge that is antithetical to ideological fanaticism. But this requires that we face our fear of the duality of the human psyche—the existence of good and the capacity for evil in every individual.
In this seminal book, Jung compellingly argues that only then can we begin to cope with the dangers posed by mass society—"the sum total of individuals"—and resist the potential threats posed by those in power.
In this challenging and provocative work, Dr. Carl Jung—one of history's greatest minds—argues that civilization's future depends on our ability as individuals to resist the collective forces of society. Only by gaining an awareness and understanding of one's unconscious mind and true, inner nature—"the undiscovered self"—can we as individuals acquire the self-knowledge that is antithetical to ideological fanaticism. But this requires that we face our fear of the duality of the human psyche—the existence of good and the capacity for evil in every individual.
In this seminal book, Jung compellingly argues that only then can we begin to cope with the dangers posed by mass society—"the sum total of individuals"—and resist the potential threats posed by those in power.
Paperback
First published January 1, 1961
1411 people are currently reading
38789 people want to read
About the author
C.G. Jung
1,881 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 882 reviews
September 15, 2015
I opened this book without any expectations, so I can’t say I was surprised by its contents; but I am indeed surprised that it is still so well-liked and widely read. The Undiscovered Self is a book mired in a Cold War mentality—fear of communism, totalitarianism, technology, world destruction—so I find it interesting how many people feel that it hasn’t lost any of its relevance. Well, perhaps they’re right; after all, we still have oppressive governments, dangerous mass-movements, and weapons capable of destroying the world. So what is Jung’s message, then?
Jung accepts Freud’s central premise that the mind is separated into the conscious and the unconscious. The conscious is the realm of the rational, the scientific, the social, the cultural; the unconscious is the realm of the irrational, the violent, the spiritual, the religious, the holy. Jung believes that, in the past, when religion was more integral to our society, these two parts of ourselves were in greater harmony; but in modern times there has arisen a split, leading to a sort of general neuroticism. The main problem is that we have attempted to suppress the unconscious completely, emphasizing only the conscious part of our nature; and this is a problem because the unconscious is the source of our individuality.
Look again at the list of things Jung associates with the conscious mind: rationality, science, culture, and so on. These are things that are, by definition, impersonal; they are the same for everyone. Thus the modern view of humankind has lost sight of the individual completely; we only attempt to understand ourselves statistically, as one part of a whole. Even modern religion, in Jung’s opinion, has turned into a mass movement, whereas it should really be a way to connect individual souls with the divine. This overemphasis on the conscious mind has made us suggestible; we are always seeking value and definition from the outside, since we can’t find it within. The result of this is that the few people who have embraced their individuality can easily become leaders, perhaps tyrants, bending the masses to their whims.
Jung’s proposed solution is simple: encourage people to get in touch with their unconscious minds. This can be done through ritual, meditation, or even by seeing a psychologist. Partly this will mean acknowledging and coming to terms with the violent side of our nature. Most of the time, we view violence as something confined to evil people, enemies and criminals. This is a dangerous view, as it fails to force people to realize that the capacity for violence is a part of human nature, and thus lies within everyone. Until we understand this, we will be prone to being stirred up in violent mass-movements, since it is the people who believe they are good and peaceful who are most easily persuaded to do nasty things.
It is interesting to compare Jung’s prescription to Freud’s analysis in Civilization and its Discontents. The picture Freud paints of modern society is generally very similar to Jung’s. Freud also thinks that a source of unhappiness for the modern individual is our repressed unconsciousness. However, Freud thinks that these unconscious desires are so dangerous and illicit that they simply must be suppressed in order to have a functioning society. We just have to accept a certain amount of unhappiness, and try to minimize the occasions when our repressed violent impulses boil over into wars and exterminations. Jung has a less pessimistic view of our unconscious desires; he accepts that they can be violent, but he also sees them as a great source of strength and happiness.
For my part, I think the psychological premise in both of these works is simplistic. I don’t think we can get very far in the analysis of the mind by dividing it up into two chunks, conscious and unconscious; nor do I think that living in a modern society requires such intense repression and self-negation. Further, I can’t agree with Jung that our troubles stem from an overemphasis on reason; rather, I think a lack of rational thinking is more often the problem. And besides, what is this “true self” that we are trying to get in touch with? After reading Montaigne, the writer who best exemplified the chaotic torrent of our conscious experience, I am very skeptical that there is any such being at our core to get in touch with, and that we are, rather, like our thoughts, an ever-changing flux.
Jung accepts Freud’s central premise that the mind is separated into the conscious and the unconscious. The conscious is the realm of the rational, the scientific, the social, the cultural; the unconscious is the realm of the irrational, the violent, the spiritual, the religious, the holy. Jung believes that, in the past, when religion was more integral to our society, these two parts of ourselves were in greater harmony; but in modern times there has arisen a split, leading to a sort of general neuroticism. The main problem is that we have attempted to suppress the unconscious completely, emphasizing only the conscious part of our nature; and this is a problem because the unconscious is the source of our individuality.
Look again at the list of things Jung associates with the conscious mind: rationality, science, culture, and so on. These are things that are, by definition, impersonal; they are the same for everyone. Thus the modern view of humankind has lost sight of the individual completely; we only attempt to understand ourselves statistically, as one part of a whole. Even modern religion, in Jung’s opinion, has turned into a mass movement, whereas it should really be a way to connect individual souls with the divine. This overemphasis on the conscious mind has made us suggestible; we are always seeking value and definition from the outside, since we can’t find it within. The result of this is that the few people who have embraced their individuality can easily become leaders, perhaps tyrants, bending the masses to their whims.
Jung’s proposed solution is simple: encourage people to get in touch with their unconscious minds. This can be done through ritual, meditation, or even by seeing a psychologist. Partly this will mean acknowledging and coming to terms with the violent side of our nature. Most of the time, we view violence as something confined to evil people, enemies and criminals. This is a dangerous view, as it fails to force people to realize that the capacity for violence is a part of human nature, and thus lies within everyone. Until we understand this, we will be prone to being stirred up in violent mass-movements, since it is the people who believe they are good and peaceful who are most easily persuaded to do nasty things.
It is interesting to compare Jung’s prescription to Freud’s analysis in Civilization and its Discontents. The picture Freud paints of modern society is generally very similar to Jung’s. Freud also thinks that a source of unhappiness for the modern individual is our repressed unconsciousness. However, Freud thinks that these unconscious desires are so dangerous and illicit that they simply must be suppressed in order to have a functioning society. We just have to accept a certain amount of unhappiness, and try to minimize the occasions when our repressed violent impulses boil over into wars and exterminations. Jung has a less pessimistic view of our unconscious desires; he accepts that they can be violent, but he also sees them as a great source of strength and happiness.
For my part, I think the psychological premise in both of these works is simplistic. I don’t think we can get very far in the analysis of the mind by dividing it up into two chunks, conscious and unconscious; nor do I think that living in a modern society requires such intense repression and self-negation. Further, I can’t agree with Jung that our troubles stem from an overemphasis on reason; rather, I think a lack of rational thinking is more often the problem. And besides, what is this “true self” that we are trying to get in touch with? After reading Montaigne, the writer who best exemplified the chaotic torrent of our conscious experience, I am very skeptical that there is any such being at our core to get in touch with, and that we are, rather, like our thoughts, an ever-changing flux.
May 23, 2021
I read this book and I gained a greater appreciation of my own nature. Without self-knowledge there can be no growth. The ills of society and the destructive forces that plague us are due to a lack of reflection or willingness to do personal work. To know one's self is the most important part of being human, because with self-knowledge comes compassion and integrity.
As an artist attempting to find her place in a society that is loud and demands that "winners" vie for a turn in the spotlight, I have often felt at odds with the whole infrastructure of success.
This book opened my eyes to the true cause for agony in our world.
At the time, when I read this book, I felt a little like Humpty Dumpty. I felt like there must be something wrong with me for not wanting to participate or push myself into the spotlight —that I was broken or unable to find the spark necessary for competition based success. I was unable to reconcile what IS with what AUGHT to be. I wondered, why do we so often stray from peaceful and rational serenity? This book made more sense of the whole, explained my dilemma, and informed my vocational purpose in creating art.
As an artist attempting to find her place in a society that is loud and demands that "winners" vie for a turn in the spotlight, I have often felt at odds with the whole infrastructure of success.
This book opened my eyes to the true cause for agony in our world.
At the time, when I read this book, I felt a little like Humpty Dumpty. I felt like there must be something wrong with me for not wanting to participate or push myself into the spotlight —that I was broken or unable to find the spark necessary for competition based success. I was unable to reconcile what IS with what AUGHT to be. I wondered, why do we so often stray from peaceful and rational serenity? This book made more sense of the whole, explained my dilemma, and informed my vocational purpose in creating art.
June 14, 2025
Carl Jung = the neighborhood alcoholics after their third drink.
I make this comparison because, despite the complex topics he discusses, he doesn’t use unnecessarily complicated language—everything is precise and clear.
I expected the book to be more focused on psychology—after all, Jung is a psychologist—but he chooses to step beyond the boundaries of psychology and creates a deeply philosophical and social essay that raises the question of how individuality can survive in a mass society, under ideological subjugation and spiritual disorientation. This short yet idea-rich piece was written in 1957, but its themes are eerily relevant today.
Jung analyzes the crisis of modern man, trapped by ideologies, institutions, and collective thinking. He argues that the greatest threat to freedom doesn’t come solely from dictatorships, but from the individual’s inability to discover and accept themselves. Societies become dehumanized because people abandon their inner core in search of security in the crowd, in group identity, religion, or politics.
But here's something very important—he's not against religion or the state, as long as they are seen by individuals as noble purposes and not as daily routines blindly followed. He even believes that if a person is religious or concerned about their country, their chances of suffering from mental illness are lower. This, however, applies to any higher purpose—it could be in science, art, sports, family, and so on. I was actually surprised to find that my own views completely aligned with Jung’s—there’s even a chance I read excerpts from this book when I was younger, which may have shaped my current conclusions.
Jung’s central idea is that every person must take personal responsibility for themselves and discover their authenticity in order to truly exist as a moral, conscious being in the world. Without this effort, people easily become faceless cells in the social fabric—manipulable and dangerous.
Now I’m venturing into dangerous territory, because this wasn’t directly in the book, and I’m not sure I understood Jung correctly. The theme of knowing oneself is something passed down through the ages, starting with the inscription at the Temple of Apollo—“Gnothi Seauton.” Jung believes that over the centuries, we’ve strayed far from this idea, to the point where it has become incomprehensible to us. His argument is that humanity once had a better connection with knowing and loving oneself, because religion and politics were more balanced with the human experience—not just statistical outcomes. What do I mean? A few thousand years ago, we loved ourselves and our neighbor. A few centuries later, we were even expected to find a way to love our enemies. And now, overall, we love nothing—we’ve returned to the initial stage, only now it’s a bit harder to stop being just a function and start being human.
This may sound a bit like Andrew Tate, the Matrix meme, the database of ones and zeros—I can’t say exactly what the difference is between Jung’s idea and Tate’s, since I’m not really familiar with the latter. But Jung’s idea is to strive for higher goals, to be critical, and to connect with both our rational world and our spiritual one. According to Jung, the rational world is our conscious side, and the spiritual world is rooted in our subconscious and emotions.
To conclude: C.G. Jung’s text may sometimes come across as slightly anarchistic, but I think that’s because, when he wrote it, he was mainly drawing from examples of dictatorial regimes and didn’t have much exposure to countries with functioning democracies.
Pre_read:
I need to read books like this so you’ll think I’m smart. I’ll use this one as an introduction to the ideas of C.G. Jung — then we’ll see if we become friends, depending on whether he convinces me to read more of his work.
I make this comparison because, despite the complex topics he discusses, he doesn’t use unnecessarily complicated language—everything is precise and clear.
I expected the book to be more focused on psychology—after all, Jung is a psychologist—but he chooses to step beyond the boundaries of psychology and creates a deeply philosophical and social essay that raises the question of how individuality can survive in a mass society, under ideological subjugation and spiritual disorientation. This short yet idea-rich piece was written in 1957, but its themes are eerily relevant today.
Jung analyzes the crisis of modern man, trapped by ideologies, institutions, and collective thinking. He argues that the greatest threat to freedom doesn’t come solely from dictatorships, but from the individual’s inability to discover and accept themselves. Societies become dehumanized because people abandon their inner core in search of security in the crowd, in group identity, religion, or politics.
But here's something very important—he's not against religion or the state, as long as they are seen by individuals as noble purposes and not as daily routines blindly followed. He even believes that if a person is religious or concerned about their country, their chances of suffering from mental illness are lower. This, however, applies to any higher purpose—it could be in science, art, sports, family, and so on. I was actually surprised to find that my own views completely aligned with Jung’s—there’s even a chance I read excerpts from this book when I was younger, which may have shaped my current conclusions.
Jung’s central idea is that every person must take personal responsibility for themselves and discover their authenticity in order to truly exist as a moral, conscious being in the world. Without this effort, people easily become faceless cells in the social fabric—manipulable and dangerous.
This may sound a bit like Andrew Tate, the Matrix meme, the database of ones and zeros—I can’t say exactly what the difference is between Jung’s idea and Tate’s, since I’m not really familiar with the latter. But Jung’s idea is to strive for higher goals, to be critical, and to connect with both our rational world and our spiritual one. According to Jung, the rational world is our conscious side, and the spiritual world is rooted in our subconscious and emotions.
To conclude: C.G. Jung’s text may sometimes come across as slightly anarchistic, but I think that’s because, when he wrote it, he was mainly drawing from examples of dictatorial regimes and didn’t have much exposure to countries with functioning democracies.
Pre_read:
I need to read books like this so you’ll think I’m smart. I’ll use this one as an introduction to the ideas of C.G. Jung — then we’ll see if we become friends, depending on whether he convinces me to read more of his work.
November 4, 2021
Значи за това бил целият този шум. Велик Юнг!
December 9, 2011
Everyone needs to read this book. In a society over-saturated with media and driven by mass consumerism, it is hard to figure out who you are as an individual. Jung argues that no society can thrive if individuals to not get to know themselves. Not in the conscious "I like to read" sense but in the unconscious sense.
December 1, 2025
The dictator State has one great advantage over bourgeois reason: along with the individual it swallows up his religious forces. The State takes the place of God; that is why, seen from this angle, the socialist dictatorships are religions and State slavery is a form of worship. But the religious function cannot be dislocated and falsified in this way without giving rise to secret doubts, which are immediately repressed so as to avoid conflict with the prevail trend towards mass-mindedness. […] The policy of the State is exalted to a creed, the leader or party boss becomes a demigod beyond good and evil, and his votaries are honored as heroes, martyrs, apostles, missionaries. There is only one truth and beside it no other. It is sacrosanct and above criticism. Anyone who thinks differently is a heretic, who, as we know from history, is threatened with all manner of unpleasant things. Only the party boss, who holds the political power in his hands, can interpret the State doctrine authentically, and he does so just as suits him.
The Undiscovered Self ~~ C.G. Jung
My reading plan for November is always Nonfiction November; my focus is, of course, nonfiction. I read a variety of nonfiction genres, and always try to fit in a book on psychology, usually picking something by C.G. Jung. Little did I know how profound reading The Undiscovered Self during this upsetting time would be. Jung addressed the rise of fascism in Nazi Germany and made a prediction that someday the United States would succumb to fascist nationalism as well. How prophetic he was.
1957, C.G. Jung is very concerned with the Cold War, Communism and the threat of nationalism. He looks to the future and predictions the rise of fascism in the United States.
Jung is alarmed about mass-mindedness ~~ the reduction of individuals to anonymous, like-thinking units of humanity, to be manipulated by propaganda, journalism and advertising into fulfilling whatever function is required of them by those in power. Jung already saw this emerging in 1957 western culture.
Jung believes that resisting this mass mentality can only be done effectively by the person who understands their own individuality. He advocates a return to the helpful medieval view that man is a microcosm, a reflection of the great cosmos in miniature. We have to get ourselves in order before we can get the rest of the world in order. Modern man is estranged from his instincts and taught to distrust them, imposing an alien reason on them and creating a split consciousness. Yet instincts cannot be suppressed ~~ an example is the continued appeal of religion even in the face of knowledge that conflicts with it. When we have no religion, we create alternative gods out of money, work, the state, politicians.
The Undiscovered Self takes the us through a journey in which it is impossible not to think about one’s own psyche. It is a beautiful work of art in which it is clear to see the damage that mass movements do to the human species. Every day people set out to find the similarities between humans around the world, and try to pin them together. It has become a fashion, but it is important not to forget that each and everyone of us is an individual. There is no such thing as two equal humans. Jung emphasizes the damage that nationalism, dictatorships and fascism cause to the individual, and how, as humans, we should try to understand our consciousness, and its foundations. This work is beautifully written, eye opening, and filled with passion. The Undiscovered Self will hopefully lead you into a state of introspection and self-reflection.
Lastly, there are no easy answers in The Undiscovered Self about how to discover the undiscovered self: C.G. Jung’s whole point is that we should get away from great generalizations and theories, and view individual an individual.
The Undiscovered Self ~~ C.G. Jung
My reading plan for November is always Nonfiction November; my focus is, of course, nonfiction. I read a variety of nonfiction genres, and always try to fit in a book on psychology, usually picking something by C.G. Jung. Little did I know how profound reading The Undiscovered Self during this upsetting time would be. Jung addressed the rise of fascism in Nazi Germany and made a prediction that someday the United States would succumb to fascist nationalism as well. How prophetic he was.
1957, C.G. Jung is very concerned with the Cold War, Communism and the threat of nationalism. He looks to the future and predictions the rise of fascism in the United States.
Jung is alarmed about mass-mindedness ~~ the reduction of individuals to anonymous, like-thinking units of humanity, to be manipulated by propaganda, journalism and advertising into fulfilling whatever function is required of them by those in power. Jung already saw this emerging in 1957 western culture.
Jung believes that resisting this mass mentality can only be done effectively by the person who understands their own individuality. He advocates a return to the helpful medieval view that man is a microcosm, a reflection of the great cosmos in miniature. We have to get ourselves in order before we can get the rest of the world in order. Modern man is estranged from his instincts and taught to distrust them, imposing an alien reason on them and creating a split consciousness. Yet instincts cannot be suppressed ~~ an example is the continued appeal of religion even in the face of knowledge that conflicts with it. When we have no religion, we create alternative gods out of money, work, the state, politicians.
The Undiscovered Self takes the us through a journey in which it is impossible not to think about one’s own psyche. It is a beautiful work of art in which it is clear to see the damage that mass movements do to the human species. Every day people set out to find the similarities between humans around the world, and try to pin them together. It has become a fashion, but it is important not to forget that each and everyone of us is an individual. There is no such thing as two equal humans. Jung emphasizes the damage that nationalism, dictatorships and fascism cause to the individual, and how, as humans, we should try to understand our consciousness, and its foundations. This work is beautifully written, eye opening, and filled with passion. The Undiscovered Self will hopefully lead you into a state of introspection and self-reflection.
Lastly, there are no easy answers in The Undiscovered Self about how to discover the undiscovered self: C.G. Jung’s whole point is that we should get away from great generalizations and theories, and view individual an individual.
Read
October 3, 2024Last night, I had the most bizarre dream. Not even Freud would find a coherent interpretation. It was like I was minding my own business, strolling through a surreal Dali painting, trying to fathom the difference between a masterpiece and an inkblot, when , suddenly, I felt a silent, but opressive presence.
" - Hey, you ! You neglect me, as always, " said a voice from nowhere. I look around.. I see nobody, except my shadow..
"- Oh, Shady...Don't start again !
My nerves are more tense than an erect tool. What is it now ?
- Oh, don't play dumb ! You know exactly why I'm here . You never listen to me ! "
" - Listen to you ? You're my shadow, you're supposed to follow me around, not give me life advices. "
" - Whoa ! Typical. Always ignoring the darkest side of yourself. Jung will be so disappointed.
" - Oh ! Here we go with the Jungian lecture. What is it this time ? My repressed desires ? My unconscious mind ?
" - Exactly. You keep pushing me away, pretending I don't exist. But I'm a part of you, buddy. That part that wants it all, right here , right now, that part who wants to read women's minds, ( btw, trust me, you don't want that ) - and who thinks he's the navel of the planet.
" - Listen to me , little bastard.
I'm just trying to be a person of integrity, with civic, moral sense, and if possible - to save the planet from...shadows like you. "
All of a sudden, I woke up agitated.. And felt a huge need to cool off with some cold water.
But.. when I looked in the mirror...I was out of breath.. It was no one but Him. My shadow, grinning at me. A deafening silence broke my eardrums.
Jung, why don't you write fairy tales ?
" - Hey, you ! You neglect me, as always, " said a voice from nowhere. I look around.. I see nobody, except my shadow..
"- Oh, Shady...Don't start again !
My nerves are more tense than an erect tool. What is it now ?
- Oh, don't play dumb ! You know exactly why I'm here . You never listen to me ! "
" - Listen to you ? You're my shadow, you're supposed to follow me around, not give me life advices. "
" - Whoa ! Typical. Always ignoring the darkest side of yourself. Jung will be so disappointed.
" - Oh ! Here we go with the Jungian lecture. What is it this time ? My repressed desires ? My unconscious mind ?
" - Exactly. You keep pushing me away, pretending I don't exist. But I'm a part of you, buddy. That part that wants it all, right here , right now, that part who wants to read women's minds, ( btw, trust me, you don't want that ) - and who thinks he's the navel of the planet.
" - Listen to me , little bastard.
I'm just trying to be a person of integrity, with civic, moral sense, and if possible - to save the planet from...shadows like you. "
All of a sudden, I woke up agitated.. And felt a huge need to cool off with some cold water.
But.. when I looked in the mirror...I was out of breath.. It was no one but Him. My shadow, grinning at me. A deafening silence broke my eardrums.
Jung, why don't you write fairy tales ?
February 8, 2022
Защо не бях посегнал към Юнг досега?
Главно, защото психолозите / психоаналитиците пишат обикновено крайно нечетивно.
И ето, какво изключение!
Още с първите изречения ме спечели. Имаше нещо от сорта "зад всеки освидетелстван, стоят поне още 10 с психични разтройства ..." :).
Накратко - много изчистено и структурирано, много логично ми звучи всичко. Поток от мисли, който звучи буден, аналитичен, критичен. Задължително ще се чете още от Юнг, както впрочем имам да наваксвам и с плановете си за Фройд.
Главно, защото психолозите / психоаналитиците пишат обикновено крайно нечетивно.
И ето, какво изключение!
Още с първите изречения ме спечели. Имаше нещо от сорта "зад всеки освидетелстван, стоят поне още 10 с психични разтройства ..." :).
Накратко - много изчистено и структурирано, много логично ми звучи всичко. Поток от мисли, който звучи буден, аналитичен, критичен. Задължително ще се чете още от Юнг, както впрочем имам да наваксвам и с плановете си за Фройд.
April 13, 2022
". يجب أن لا نُفهم الإنسان على أنه وحدة متكررة. بل هو في الحقيقة شيء فريد ومفرد لا يمكننا في التحليل الأخير أن نعـرّفه ولا أن نشبهه بأي شيء سواه."
.
من الصعب ان تقرأ كتاب لـ"كارل يونج" , مع ترجمة سيئة وحرفية خالية من المعنى الحقيقي لكلمات المؤلف ,,
أغلب الصحفات تجد أنها مجرد كلمات قد رتبت بطريقة صعبة الفهم ,, مجرد ترجمة من اللغة الأصلية الى اللغة العربية بطريقة سريعة وغير عميقة,
ولأن أسلوب "كارل يونج" معقد وصعب للغاية , حيث يتطرق الى عدة مواضيع في السطر الواحد دون مقدمة أو نهاية لأفكاره الشخصية , شعرت بأنني ضائعة في أغلب الصفحات وكان يجب أن أعيد قرائتها أكثر من مرة لعلي أفهم شيء جديداً..
شعرت بأن الكتاب نوعاً ما غير مناسب للزمن الحالي, لأننا نرى الكاتب مازال ينتقد ويتطرق إلى تصرفات النظام الشيوعي ,وكيف يمكنه التحكم بخيارات الفرد, وتقيد مستقبله وخططه الشخصية ,
وللأسف كان هذا الموضوع يتكرر في كل فصل من كتابه.
ولكن إذا غيرنا كلمة "الحزب الشيوعي" إلى أحزابنا السياسية الحالية سوف نرى أن الزمن يعيد نفسه مرة اخرى ولكن تحت مسميات جديدة.
والآن لو تجاهلنا الترجمة السيئة , والهوس الشديد في النظام الشيوعي, سوف نجد أن الكتاب يحتوي على الكثير من المعلومات المفيدة والمناسبة للجميع ..
خصوصا تطرقه الى النفس البشرية ,
على الرغم أن الأمثلة التي كان يكتبها موجهة الى المجتمع الغربي الحديث , ولكن الكثير من المشاكل تنطبق علينا نحن ايضاً,
فما زالت المؤسسات الدينية تريد من أتباعها الإنصياع التام بدون نقاش أو تفكير خاص بهم, وتريد منهم أن يكونوا نسخ متشابهه ومكررة لا جديد أو تمييز في أفكارهم او أفعالهم,
وللأسف مازلنا إلى الآن لانفهم أن ميزة الجماعة هي منح الأمان لأفرادها وتنظيم الكتل البشرية وصنع قرار يؤدي إلى تحقيق مطالب الفرد .. ونحن بكل أسف نجهل ذلك إلى الآن , وكل مايمكننا فعله هو الإيمان بقائد أعمى قد لا يكون جديراً بالعمل تحت سلطته أو التضحية لأجله.
.
الكتاب فيه الكثير من المعاني المخفية والعميقة , حيث يتحدث عن النفس البشرية وعن ضياع تميزها مع الحشود التي لاتفعل شيئاً سوى الأنصياع للقوة العظمى في دائرتها , ولهذا السبب نرى أن تميز الأنسان يختفي يوماً بعد يوم لما يواجهه من عقبات نفسية ومادية تدمر في داخله كل حب للأكتشاف والتطور . لأننا ببساطة نعيش في مجتمع لايبحث عن قائد جديد ينير ظلمة الطريق, وانما يبحث على تابع أعمى ينفذ كل أمر يوجه إليه دون نقد أو سؤال أو حتى مجرد التفكير في خطوته القادمة.
.
"إن الانتقاص من قيمة النفس ومقاومة التنوير السيكولوجيّ
قائمان إلى حدٍّ كبيرٍ على الخوف المريع من الاكتشافات التي قد تنجمُ عن التنقيب في أغوارها الخفيّة
.
من الصعب ان تقرأ كتاب لـ"كارل يونج" , مع ترجمة سيئة وحرفية خالية من المعنى الحقيقي لكلمات المؤلف ,,
أغلب الصحفات تجد أنها مجرد كلمات قد رتبت بطريقة صعبة الفهم ,, مجرد ترجمة من اللغة الأصلية الى اللغة العربية بطريقة سريعة وغير عميقة,
ولأن أسلوب "كارل يونج" معقد وصعب للغاية , حيث يتطرق الى عدة مواضيع في السطر الواحد دون مقدمة أو نهاية لأفكاره الشخصية , شعرت بأنني ضائعة في أغلب الصفحات وكان يجب أن أعيد قرائتها أكثر من مرة لعلي أفهم شيء جديداً..
شعرت بأن الكتاب نوعاً ما غير مناسب للزمن الحالي, لأننا نرى الكاتب مازال ينتقد ويتطرق إلى تصرفات النظام الشيوعي ,وكيف يمكنه التحكم بخيارات الفرد, وتقيد مستقبله وخططه الشخصية ,
وللأسف كان هذا الموضوع يتكرر في كل فصل من كتابه.
ولكن إذا غيرنا كلمة "الحزب الشيوعي" إلى أحزابنا السياسية الحالية سوف نرى أن الزمن يعيد نفسه مرة اخرى ولكن تحت مسميات جديدة.
والآن لو تجاهلنا الترجمة السيئة , والهوس الشديد في النظام الشيوعي, سوف نجد أن الكتاب يحتوي على الكثير من المعلومات المفيدة والمناسبة للجميع ..
خصوصا تطرقه الى النفس البشرية ,
على الرغم أن الأمثلة التي كان يكتبها موجهة الى المجتمع الغربي الحديث , ولكن الكثير من المشاكل تنطبق علينا نحن ايضاً,
فما زالت المؤسسات الدينية تريد من أتباعها الإنصياع التام بدون نقاش أو تفكير خاص بهم, وتريد منهم أن يكونوا نسخ متشابهه ومكررة لا جديد أو تمييز في أفكارهم او أفعالهم,
وللأسف مازلنا إلى الآن لانفهم أن ميزة الجماعة هي منح الأمان لأفرادها وتنظيم الكتل البشرية وصنع قرار يؤدي إلى تحقيق مطالب الفرد .. ونحن بكل أسف نجهل ذلك إلى الآن , وكل مايمكننا فعله هو الإيمان بقائد أعمى قد لا يكون جديراً بالعمل تحت سلطته أو التضحية لأجله.
.
الكتاب فيه الكثير من المعاني المخفية والعميقة , حيث يتحدث عن النفس البشرية وعن ضياع تميزها مع الحشود التي لاتفعل شيئاً سوى الأنصياع للقوة العظمى في دائرتها , ولهذا السبب نرى أن تميز الأنسان يختفي يوماً بعد يوم لما يواجهه من عقبات نفسية ومادية تدمر في داخله كل حب للأكتشاف والتطور . لأننا ببساطة نعيش في مجتمع لايبحث عن قائد جديد ينير ظلمة الطريق, وانما يبحث على تابع أعمى ينفذ كل أمر يوجه إليه دون نقد أو سؤال أو حتى مجرد التفكير في خطوته القادمة.
.
"إن الانتقاص من قيمة النفس ومقاومة التنوير السيكولوجيّ
قائمان إلى حدٍّ كبيرٍ على الخوف المريع من الاكتشافات التي قد تنجمُ عن التنقيب في أغوارها الخفيّة
January 11, 2026
“… does the individual know that he is the makeweight that tips the scales?”
I loved the little exposure I had to Jung as a psych major in college. Much later, when his name appeared in my reading of Joseph Campbell, I realized his theories were still with me. This is my first attempt to read his work for fun, and while I’m quite late to the game, I’m hoping it’s only the beginning.
Published in 1961, the year he died, this work focuses on the dangers facing us (understandably for the time, the atomic bomb was top of mind), and how to battle them. He seems to be saying that we must focus on understanding our shadow selves and conquering ourselves, rather than looking outside to blame “the other.”
He compares “religion” and “the state,” as ways we are grouped and both manipulated and inspired. He points out that the state looks at us as statistics, whereas in his view of religion (which emphasizes the symbolic, metaphorical side), we are guided to respect and promote our individuality, and he sees this path as preferable and more likely to promote the health of ourselves and our fellow beings.
He gives a brilliant discussion of the connection between archetypes--our sort of inherited mythology--and art; how we keep seeing these things repeated in life, and how they might be where wisdom lies and be the best deterrent to our superficial culture.
His view is so refreshingly counter to the finger-pointing and demonizing of certain groups so prevalent today, and that set us perpetually against each other. Regarding mankind’s atrocities, he says, “Man has done these things; I am a man, who has his share of human nature; therefore I am guilty with the rest and bear unaltered and indelibly within me the capacity and the inclination to do them again at any time … None of us stands outside humanity’s black collective shadow.”
This was a challenging read for me, but I was happy to find it didn’t all go over my head. I can tell there’s so much to learn from studying this great thinker, and I look forward to more soon.
“A human relationship is not based on differentiation and perfection, for these only emphasize the differences or call forth the exact opposite; it is based, rather, on imperfection, on what is weak, helpless and in need of support--the very ground and motive of dependence.”
I loved the little exposure I had to Jung as a psych major in college. Much later, when his name appeared in my reading of Joseph Campbell, I realized his theories were still with me. This is my first attempt to read his work for fun, and while I’m quite late to the game, I’m hoping it’s only the beginning.
Published in 1961, the year he died, this work focuses on the dangers facing us (understandably for the time, the atomic bomb was top of mind), and how to battle them. He seems to be saying that we must focus on understanding our shadow selves and conquering ourselves, rather than looking outside to blame “the other.”
He compares “religion” and “the state,” as ways we are grouped and both manipulated and inspired. He points out that the state looks at us as statistics, whereas in his view of religion (which emphasizes the symbolic, metaphorical side), we are guided to respect and promote our individuality, and he sees this path as preferable and more likely to promote the health of ourselves and our fellow beings.
He gives a brilliant discussion of the connection between archetypes--our sort of inherited mythology--and art; how we keep seeing these things repeated in life, and how they might be where wisdom lies and be the best deterrent to our superficial culture.
His view is so refreshingly counter to the finger-pointing and demonizing of certain groups so prevalent today, and that set us perpetually against each other. Regarding mankind’s atrocities, he says, “Man has done these things; I am a man, who has his share of human nature; therefore I am guilty with the rest and bear unaltered and indelibly within me the capacity and the inclination to do them again at any time … None of us stands outside humanity’s black collective shadow.”
This was a challenging read for me, but I was happy to find it didn’t all go over my head. I can tell there’s so much to learn from studying this great thinker, and I look forward to more soon.
“A human relationship is not based on differentiation and perfection, for these only emphasize the differences or call forth the exact opposite; it is based, rather, on imperfection, on what is weak, helpless and in need of support--the very ground and motive of dependence.”
February 24, 2011
Jung's thesis in this book is that modern society turns individuals into a social mass where they are categorized by statistical averages that dehumanize people who are, inherently, unique beings who operate by "irregularity." Modern society thus turns inevitably into the state with its standardized laws and policies, and is run by rulers that are "mouthpieces of the state doctrine," and by a "Leader" who "almost infallibly becomes the victim of his own inflated ego-consciousness." This is how Jung has the "constitutional state" drifting into "the situation of a primitive form of society, namely the communism of a primitive tribe where everybody is subject to the autocratic rule of a chief or an oligarchy." This is interesting political theory.
The modern state suppresses individuality with official doctrine, creeds, and truth and turns people into social units. To correct this situation, Jung sees a vital role for the individual's private relationship with "an extramundane authority" (as opposed to mass, organized religion) that taps into "the inner man." This is "the undiscovered self." As to what that might be, Jung calls it "an insoluble puzzle" that, nevertheless, must be allowed expression via symbols and such that conduce "to synthesis" (versus "a dissociation of personality"), allowing the individual to regain control of his or her life. For Jung, the "puzzle" that must be solved is to adapt instinctive, a priori archetypal forms "into ideas which are adequate to the challenges of the present." Psychic health appears to involve some sort of "immediate relation to God," a tapping into one's instinctive being, and expression of what lies inside rather than its suppression. Somehow, this leads to self-knowledge and health and, we presume, counters mass society and its oppressive nature.
Jung weaves many separate ideas together in a long, tenuous, stream of consciousness sort of way and it's not particularly clear what we will find when we tap into our unconscious and how that will counter the ills of mass society. Jung is clear that evil is built into our nature so the presumption must be that understanding this side of our nature enables us to control it somehow. He also affirmatively asserts we must love our neighbor. Where love stops, he says, power, violence and terror begin. Jung seems to have faith that when one looks inside, somehow love will find a way to conquer power, violence and terror. Human history suggests, however, that it's also prudent that power be held in reserve if love fails to do its job. That, it is evident, would make Jung uncomfortable.
The modern state suppresses individuality with official doctrine, creeds, and truth and turns people into social units. To correct this situation, Jung sees a vital role for the individual's private relationship with "an extramundane authority" (as opposed to mass, organized religion) that taps into "the inner man." This is "the undiscovered self." As to what that might be, Jung calls it "an insoluble puzzle" that, nevertheless, must be allowed expression via symbols and such that conduce "to synthesis" (versus "a dissociation of personality"), allowing the individual to regain control of his or her life. For Jung, the "puzzle" that must be solved is to adapt instinctive, a priori archetypal forms "into ideas which are adequate to the challenges of the present." Psychic health appears to involve some sort of "immediate relation to God," a tapping into one's instinctive being, and expression of what lies inside rather than its suppression. Somehow, this leads to self-knowledge and health and, we presume, counters mass society and its oppressive nature.
Jung weaves many separate ideas together in a long, tenuous, stream of consciousness sort of way and it's not particularly clear what we will find when we tap into our unconscious and how that will counter the ills of mass society. Jung is clear that evil is built into our nature so the presumption must be that understanding this side of our nature enables us to control it somehow. He also affirmatively asserts we must love our neighbor. Where love stops, he says, power, violence and terror begin. Jung seems to have faith that when one looks inside, somehow love will find a way to conquer power, violence and terror. Human history suggests, however, that it's also prudent that power be held in reserve if love fails to do its job. That, it is evident, would make Jung uncomfortable.
Read
February 15, 2013This book is a lot better before you read it -- the distinguished black cover with its thought-provoking image: the profile of a man's head, in white, with a smaller, multicolored profile inside, superimposed by a black labyrinth. It's all so perfectly 1958! (The year The Undiscovered Self -- a beautiful title! -- was released.) But the book itself is basically an acidulous, slightly paranoid attack on Communism, tinged with a faint apology for Jung's onetime acceptance of the Nazis.
In 1958, Science and Progress were unstoppable, creating a monolithic state. Opening the book at random:
Whereas the man of today can easily think about and understand all the "truths" dished out to him by the State, his understanding of religion is made considerably more difficult owing to the lack of explanations.
You can thank R.F.C. Hull for that flat-footed translation -- or possibly the problem is the manuscript itself, by the aging Carl Jung. (He died in 1961.) Incidentally, that passage I just quoted was highlighted in blue by the nameless previous owner of my copy (a nice Mentor paperback). That highlighter got started on the very first page, when the book is described, under the headline "Prescription for Salvation." She (or he) underlined:
Dr. Jung affirmed that the survival of our civilization might well depend upon closing the widening gulf between the conscious and unconscious aspects of the human psyche.
The problem is that -- as that first, random quotation implied -- the "unconscious" turns out to basically mean Christianity.
Jung was not much of a prophet. Ten years after this book, the vast and monolithic state began to wither, replaced by niche-marketing, Hippies, libertarian Republicans and Jesus freaks. The Age of Ideology was over, replaced by the Age of Entrepreneurial Snack Bars. No longer was this passage true:
The bigger the crowd the more negligible the individual becomes. But if the individual, overwhelmed by the sense of his own puniness and impotence, should feel that his life has lost its meaning -- which, after all, is not identical with public welfare and higher standards of living -- then he is already on the road to State slavery and, without knowing or wanting it, has become its proselyte.
Farewell, State slavery! Hello, Starbucks!
In 1958, Science and Progress were unstoppable, creating a monolithic state. Opening the book at random:
Whereas the man of today can easily think about and understand all the "truths" dished out to him by the State, his understanding of religion is made considerably more difficult owing to the lack of explanations.
You can thank R.F.C. Hull for that flat-footed translation -- or possibly the problem is the manuscript itself, by the aging Carl Jung. (He died in 1961.) Incidentally, that passage I just quoted was highlighted in blue by the nameless previous owner of my copy (a nice Mentor paperback). That highlighter got started on the very first page, when the book is described, under the headline "Prescription for Salvation." She (or he) underlined:
Dr. Jung affirmed that the survival of our civilization might well depend upon closing the widening gulf between the conscious and unconscious aspects of the human psyche.
The problem is that -- as that first, random quotation implied -- the "unconscious" turns out to basically mean Christianity.
Jung was not much of a prophet. Ten years after this book, the vast and monolithic state began to wither, replaced by niche-marketing, Hippies, libertarian Republicans and Jesus freaks. The Age of Ideology was over, replaced by the Age of Entrepreneurial Snack Bars. No longer was this passage true:
The bigger the crowd the more negligible the individual becomes. But if the individual, overwhelmed by the sense of his own puniness and impotence, should feel that his life has lost its meaning -- which, after all, is not identical with public welfare and higher standards of living -- then he is already on the road to State slavery and, without knowing or wanting it, has become its proselyte.
Farewell, State slavery! Hello, Starbucks!
January 30, 2019
Jordan Peterson introduced me to Jung thru his books and his videos. While walking into work last week i stumbled upon a box of books in the trash and The Undiscovered Self just so happened to be in the mix, so I read it. This was my first Jung book and I honestly wasn’t blown away but I couldn’t put it down. Some of the material is above my pay grade however that which I could grasp I could definitely dig it. I look at it this way, here’s this book lying on its death bed about to be sent into a trash heap to decompose and just as that’s about to occur it gets another shot at doing its job once more, and for that reason this book is special to me, we were meant for each other. I would say this books shelf life has just had a Cinderella ending.
Now I don’t know Jung well enough outside of the fact that Peterson seems to be blown away by him to understand this book that well, it’s a lot of jibber jabber to me, but I think if I was to dedicate more time to reading more of his works and finding out about the man himself I could come to be a fan as well, I see more Jung books in my future.
“It is, unfortunately, only too clear that if the individual is not truly regenerated in spirit, society cannot be either, for society is the sum total of individuals in need of redemption.”
Now I don’t know Jung well enough outside of the fact that Peterson seems to be blown away by him to understand this book that well, it’s a lot of jibber jabber to me, but I think if I was to dedicate more time to reading more of his works and finding out about the man himself I could come to be a fan as well, I see more Jung books in my future.
“It is, unfortunately, only too clear that if the individual is not truly regenerated in spirit, society cannot be either, for society is the sum total of individuals in need of redemption.”
April 28, 2022
In this book, CG Jung argues that only self-knowledge and religious experience can provide resistance to totalitarianism, but individuals have been failed by organised religion and also by modern science.
The most interesting part for me is Jung's explanation of neurosis. When a neurosis breaks out in an adult, the fantasy world of childhood reappears. These effects develop only when an individual is faced with a situation which he can't overcome by conscious means. The resulting standstill in the development of personality opens a sluice for infantile fantasies, which are latent in everybody, but don't manifest themselves as long as the conscious personality can continue on its way unimpeded.
Since the normal fantasies of a child are nothing other than the imagination of the instincts it follows that the fantasies of the neurotic contain a core of normal instinct, the hallmark of which is adaptedness.
The most interesting part for me is Jung's explanation of neurosis. When a neurosis breaks out in an adult, the fantasy world of childhood reappears. These effects develop only when an individual is faced with a situation which he can't overcome by conscious means. The resulting standstill in the development of personality opens a sluice for infantile fantasies, which are latent in everybody, but don't manifest themselves as long as the conscious personality can continue on its way unimpeded.
Since the normal fantasies of a child are nothing other than the imagination of the instincts it follows that the fantasies of the neurotic contain a core of normal instinct, the hallmark of which is adaptedness.
May 6, 2015
Човешкото отвътре и отвън. Осъзнаването на индивида според Юнг:
Цялото ревю тук: http://knijenpetar.blogspot.com/2015/...
Съществува не малък процент хора, за които философията и психологията са потенциално опасни и дори вредни. Тяхната претенция за разбиране на обкръжаващия ни свят се гради на опитът им да подредят живота си така, че да понесат най-малко страдание и съответно - да наложат своята гледна точка, въпреки всички доводи, че индивидът е просто част от една група и трябва да покрие определени изисквания, за да не бъде пренебрегнат или обявен за непълноценен за обществото. Тук философията и психологията се явяват адекватни помощници, извор на познание и разбиране кое е основополагащото в развитието на един индивид и мястото му в обществото. Далеч съм от мисълта да проповядвам определени идеи и да променям съзнаваното във всеки отделен човек, решил да прочете това ревю, но ще бъда ревностен защитник на разбирането, че рискът да се изгуби индивидуалността е голям, ако човек не се запознае поне отчасти с умовете, които държат козовете на психичното ни здраве в трудовете си. Вилхелм Вунд, Уилям Джеймс, Херман Ебингхаус, Фройд, Юнг. Те са просто изследователи на все по-усложняващото се общество, в което се опитваме да живеем, и неизменни помощници, когато се търси определен подход, който да бъде от полза за всеки един от нас - като отделен индивид и като част от група индивиди. Техните думи не се отличават с изящество и поетичност, не ни хипнотизират с крилати фрази и притчи и от тях не изскачат лесни решения. Юнг казва:
„Самопознанието“ обикновено се бърка с познанието за осъзнаваната Аз-личност. Всеки, който има Аз-съзнание, естествено смята, че познава себе си. Азът обаче познава собствените си съдържания, но не и несъзнаваното и неговите съдържания. Хората измерват самопознанието си с онова, което в основни линии знае за себе си средностатистическият човек от собствената им социална среда, а не с реалните психически факти, повечето от които са тайна за тях. В това отношение психиката е като тялото: лаикът знае твърде малко за неговата физиология и анатомично устройство. Макар да живее в тялото и с тялото, до голяма степен то си остава неизвестно за него; изисква се специално научно познание, което да доведе до съзнанието му онова, което вече е познато за тялото. Да не говорим за все още непознатото, което не по-малко съществува.“ (Продължава в блога: http://knijenpetar.blogspot.com/2015/...)
Цялото ревю тук: http://knijenpetar.blogspot.com/2015/...
Съществува не малък процент хора, за които философията и психологията са потенциално опасни и дори вредни. Тяхната претенция за разбиране на обкръжаващия ни свят се гради на опитът им да подредят живота си така, че да понесат най-малко страдание и съответно - да наложат своята гледна точка, въпреки всички доводи, че индивидът е просто част от една група и трябва да покрие определени изисквания, за да не бъде пренебрегнат или обявен за непълноценен за обществото. Тук философията и психологията се явяват адекватни помощници, извор на познание и разбиране кое е основополагащото в развитието на един индивид и мястото му в обществото. Далеч съм от мисълта да проповядвам определени идеи и да променям съзнаваното във всеки отделен човек, решил да прочете това ревю, но ще бъда ревностен защитник на разбирането, че рискът да се изгуби индивидуалността е голям, ако човек не се запознае поне отчасти с умовете, които държат козовете на психичното ни здраве в трудовете си. Вилхелм Вунд, Уилям Джеймс, Херман Ебингхаус, Фройд, Юнг. Те са просто изследователи на все по-усложняващото се общество, в което се опитваме да живеем, и неизменни помощници, когато се търси определен подход, който да бъде от полза за всеки един от нас - като отделен индивид и като част от група индивиди. Техните думи не се отличават с изящество и поетичност, не ни хипнотизират с крилати фрази и притчи и от тях не изскачат лесни решения. Юнг казва:
„Самопознанието“ обикновено се бърка с познанието за осъзнаваната Аз-личност. Всеки, който има Аз-съзнание, естествено смята, че познава себе си. Азът обаче познава собствените си съдържания, но не и несъзнаваното и неговите съдържания. Хората измерват самопознанието си с онова, което в основни линии знае за себе си средностатистическият човек от собствената им социална среда, а не с реалните психически факти, повечето от които са тайна за тях. В това отношение психиката е като тялото: лаикът знае твърде малко за неговата физиология и анатомично устройство. Макар да живее в тялото и с тялото, до голяма степен то си остава неизвестно за него; изисква се специално научно познание, което да доведе до съзнанието му онова, което вече е познато за тялото. Да не говорим за все още непознатото, което не по-малко съществува.“ (Продължава в блога: http://knijenpetar.blogspot.com/2015/...)
November 30, 2010
Jung's apologia of his approach, and a defense of the individual, seems dated at times as he uses the old West vs. Communists divide to illustrate his point. But the content is so important, at least important to me as I try to take hold of my own individuality, that I find this little book to be important.
Here are a few passages that I liked from the book:
“If I want to understand an individual human being, I must lay aside all scientific knowledge of the average man and discard all theories in order to adopt a completely new and unprejudiced attitude. I can only approach the task of understanding with a free and open mind, whereas knowledge of man, or insight into human character, presupposes all sorts of knowledge about mankind in general.” Pg. 18
“If the psychologist happens to be a doctor who wants not only to classify his patient scientifically but also to understand him as a human being, he is threatened with conflict of duties between the two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive attitudes of knowledge, on the one hand, and understanding, on the other. This conflict cannot be solved by an either-or, but only by a kind of two-way thinking: doing one thing while not losing sight of the other.” Pg. 19
“The psychic situation of the individual is so menaced nowadays by advertisement, propaganda and other more or less well-meant advice and suggestions that for once in his life the patient might be offered a relationship that does not repeat the nauseating ‘you should,’ ‘you must’ and similar confessions of impotence. Against the onslaught from outside no less than against its repercussions in the psyche of the individual the doctor sees himself obliged to play the role of counsel for the defense. Fear that anarchic instincts will thereby be let loose is a possibility that is greatly exaggerated, seeing that obvious safeguards exist within and without. Above all, there is the natural cowardice of most men to be reckoned with, not to mention morality, good taste and – last but not least – the penal code. This fear is nothing compared with the enormous effort it usually costs people to help the first stirrings of individuality into consciousness, let alone put them into effect. And where these individual impulses have broken through too impetuously and unbelievably, the doctor must protect them from the patient’s own clumsy recourse to shortsightedness, ruthlessness and cynicism.” Pg. 66
“Freud was expressing his conviction that the unconscious still harbored many things that might lend themselves to ‘occult’ interpretations, as is in fact the case. These ‘archaic vestiges,’ or archetypal forms grounded on the instincts and giving expression to them, have a numinous quality that sometimes arouses fear. They are ineradicable, for they represent the ultimate foundations of the psyche itself. They cannot be grasped intellectually, and when one has destroyed one manifestation of them, they reappear in altered form. It is this fear of the unconscious psyche which not only impedes self-knowledge but is the gravest obstacle to a wider understanding and knowledge of psychology.” Pg. 61
“Subjectivization (in technical terms transference and countertransference) creates isolation from the environment, a social limitation which neither party wishes for but which invariably sets in when understanding predominates and is no longer balanced with knowledge. As understanding deepens, the further removed it becomes from knowledge. An ideal understanding would ultimately result in each party’s unthinkingly going along with the other’s experience – a state of uncritical passivity and lack of social responsibility. Understanding carried to such lengths is in any case impossible, for it would require the virtual identification of two different individuals. Sooner or later the relationship reaches a point where one partner feels he is being forced to sacrifice his own individuality so that it may be assimilated by that of the other. This inevitable consequence breaks the understanding, for understanding presupposes the integral preservation of the individuality of both partners. It is therefore advisable to carry understanding only to the point where the balance between understanding and knowledge is reached, for understanding at all costs is injurious to both partners.” Pp. 63-64
“By that time the patient should have acquired enough certainty of judgment to enable him to act on his own insight and decision and not from the mere wish to copy convention – even if he happens to agree with collective opinion. Unless he stands firmly on his own feet, the so-called objective values profit him nothing, since they then only serve as a substitute for character and so help to suppress his individuality. Naturally, society has an indisputable right to protect itself against arrant subjectivisms, but, in so far as society itself is composed of de-individualized persons, it is completely at the mercy of ruthless individualists. Let it band together into groups and organizations as much as it likes – it is just this banding together and the resultant extinction of the individual personality that makes it succumb so readily to a dictator. A million zeros joined together do not, unfortunately, add up to one. Ultimately everything depends on the quality of the individual, but fatally shortsighted habit of our age is to think only in terms of large numbers and mass organizations.” Pg. 67
“And are not Jesus and Paul prototypes of those who, trusting their inner experience, have gone their own individual ways, disregarding public opinions?” Pg. 69
“The suffocating power of the masses is paraded before our eyes in one form or another every day in the newspapers, and the insignificance of the individual is rubbed into him so thoroughly that he loses all hope of making himself heard. The outworn ideals of liberté, égalité, fraternité help him not at all, as he can direct this appeal only to his executioners, the spokesmen of the masses.” Pg. 72
“You can take away a man’s gods, but only to give him others in return. The leaders of the mass State cannot avoid being deified, and wherever the crudities of this kind have not yet been put over by force, obsessive factors arise in their stead, charged with demonic energy – for instance, money, work, political influence, and so forth. When any natural human function gets lost, i.e., is denied conscious and intentional expressions, a general disturbance results. Hence, it is quite natural that with the triumph of the Goddess of Reason a general neuroticizing of modern man should set in, a dissociation of personality analogous to the splitting of the world today by the Iron Curtain.” Pg. 77
“Instincts, however, are highly conservative and of extreme antiquity as regards both their dynamism and their form. Their form, when represented to the mind, appears as an image which expresses the nature of the instinctive impulse visually and concretely, like a picture. … Instinct is anything but a blind and indefinite impulse, since it proves to be attuned and adapted to a definite external situation. This latter circumstance gives it its specific and irreducible form. Just as instinct is original and hereditary, so, too, its form is age-old, that is to say, archetypal. It is even older and more conservative than the body’s form.” Pg. 81
“The fact that our conscious activity is rooted in instinct and derives from it its dynamism as well as the basic features of its ideational forms has the same significance for human psychology as for all other members of the animal kingdom. Human knowledge consists essentially in the constant adaptation of the primordial patterns of ideas that were given us a priori. These need certain modifications, because, in their original form, they are suited to an archaic mode of life but not to the demands of a specifically differentiated environment. If the flow of instinctive dynamism into our life is to be maintained, as is absolutely necessary for our existence, then it is imperative that we remold these archetypal forms into ideas which are adequate to the challenge of the present.” Pg. 82
“The psychologist has come to see that nothing is achieved by telling, persuading, admonishing, giving good advice. He must also get acquainted with the details and have an authentic knowledge of the psychic inventory of his patient. He has therefore to relate to the individuality of the sufferer and feel his way into all the nooks and crannies of his mind, to a degree that far exceeds the capacity of a teacher or even of a directeur de conscience. His scientific objectivity, which excludes nothing, enables him to see his patient not only as a human being but also as a subhuman who is boundto his body, like an animal. The development of science has directed his interest beyond the range of the consciou personality to the world of unconscious instinct dominated by sexuality and the power drive (or self-assertion) corresponding to the twin moral concepts of Saint Augustine: concupiscentia and superbia. The clash between these two fundamental instincts (preservation of the species and self-preservation) is the source of numerous conflicts. They are, therefore, the chief object of moral judgment, whose purpose it is to prevent these instinctual collisions as far as possible.” Pp. 89-90
“As I explained above, instinct has two main aspects: on the one hand, that of dynamism, drive or drift, and on the other, specific meaning and intention. It is highly probable that all man’s psychic functions have an instinctual foundation as is obviously the case with animals.” Pg. 90
“Nothing has a more divisive and alienating effect upon society than this moral complacency and lack of responsibility, and nothing promotes understanding and rapprochement more than the mutual withdrawal of projections. This necessary corrective requires self-criticism, for one cannot just tell the other person to withdraw them. He does not recognize them for what they are, any more than one does oneself. We can recognize our prejudices and illusions only when, from a broader psychological knowledge of ourselves and others, we are prepared to doubt the absolute rightness of our assumptions and compare them carefully and conscientiously with the objective facts.” Pp. 114-115
“Recognition of the shadow, on the other hand, leads to the modesty we need in order to acknowledge imperfection. And it is just this conscious recognition and consideration that are needed wherever a human relationship is to be established. A human relationship is not based on differentiation and perfection, for these only emphasize the differences or call forth the exact opposite; it is based, rather, on imperfection, on what is weak, helpless and in need of support – the very ground and motive of dependence. The perfect has no need of the other, but weakness has, for it seeks support and does not confront its partner with anything that might force him into an inferior position and even humiliate him. This humiliation may happen only too easily where idealism plays too prominent a role.” Pp. 116-117
“Anyone who has insight into his own action, and has thus found access to the unconscious, involuntarily exercises an influence on his environment. The deepening and broadening of his consciousness produce the kind of effect which the primitives call ‘mana.’ It is an unintentional influence on the unconscious prestige, and its effect lasts only so long as it is not disturbed by consciousness.” Pg. 121
“I am neither spurred on by excessive optimism nor in love with high ideals, but am merely concerned with the fate of the individual human being – that infinitesimal unit on whom the world depends, and in whom, if we read the meaning of the Christian message aright, even God seeks his goal.” Pg. 125
Here are a few passages that I liked from the book:
“If I want to understand an individual human being, I must lay aside all scientific knowledge of the average man and discard all theories in order to adopt a completely new and unprejudiced attitude. I can only approach the task of understanding with a free and open mind, whereas knowledge of man, or insight into human character, presupposes all sorts of knowledge about mankind in general.” Pg. 18
“If the psychologist happens to be a doctor who wants not only to classify his patient scientifically but also to understand him as a human being, he is threatened with conflict of duties between the two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive attitudes of knowledge, on the one hand, and understanding, on the other. This conflict cannot be solved by an either-or, but only by a kind of two-way thinking: doing one thing while not losing sight of the other.” Pg. 19
“The psychic situation of the individual is so menaced nowadays by advertisement, propaganda and other more or less well-meant advice and suggestions that for once in his life the patient might be offered a relationship that does not repeat the nauseating ‘you should,’ ‘you must’ and similar confessions of impotence. Against the onslaught from outside no less than against its repercussions in the psyche of the individual the doctor sees himself obliged to play the role of counsel for the defense. Fear that anarchic instincts will thereby be let loose is a possibility that is greatly exaggerated, seeing that obvious safeguards exist within and without. Above all, there is the natural cowardice of most men to be reckoned with, not to mention morality, good taste and – last but not least – the penal code. This fear is nothing compared with the enormous effort it usually costs people to help the first stirrings of individuality into consciousness, let alone put them into effect. And where these individual impulses have broken through too impetuously and unbelievably, the doctor must protect them from the patient’s own clumsy recourse to shortsightedness, ruthlessness and cynicism.” Pg. 66
“Freud was expressing his conviction that the unconscious still harbored many things that might lend themselves to ‘occult’ interpretations, as is in fact the case. These ‘archaic vestiges,’ or archetypal forms grounded on the instincts and giving expression to them, have a numinous quality that sometimes arouses fear. They are ineradicable, for they represent the ultimate foundations of the psyche itself. They cannot be grasped intellectually, and when one has destroyed one manifestation of them, they reappear in altered form. It is this fear of the unconscious psyche which not only impedes self-knowledge but is the gravest obstacle to a wider understanding and knowledge of psychology.” Pg. 61
“Subjectivization (in technical terms transference and countertransference) creates isolation from the environment, a social limitation which neither party wishes for but which invariably sets in when understanding predominates and is no longer balanced with knowledge. As understanding deepens, the further removed it becomes from knowledge. An ideal understanding would ultimately result in each party’s unthinkingly going along with the other’s experience – a state of uncritical passivity and lack of social responsibility. Understanding carried to such lengths is in any case impossible, for it would require the virtual identification of two different individuals. Sooner or later the relationship reaches a point where one partner feels he is being forced to sacrifice his own individuality so that it may be assimilated by that of the other. This inevitable consequence breaks the understanding, for understanding presupposes the integral preservation of the individuality of both partners. It is therefore advisable to carry understanding only to the point where the balance between understanding and knowledge is reached, for understanding at all costs is injurious to both partners.” Pp. 63-64
“By that time the patient should have acquired enough certainty of judgment to enable him to act on his own insight and decision and not from the mere wish to copy convention – even if he happens to agree with collective opinion. Unless he stands firmly on his own feet, the so-called objective values profit him nothing, since they then only serve as a substitute for character and so help to suppress his individuality. Naturally, society has an indisputable right to protect itself against arrant subjectivisms, but, in so far as society itself is composed of de-individualized persons, it is completely at the mercy of ruthless individualists. Let it band together into groups and organizations as much as it likes – it is just this banding together and the resultant extinction of the individual personality that makes it succumb so readily to a dictator. A million zeros joined together do not, unfortunately, add up to one. Ultimately everything depends on the quality of the individual, but fatally shortsighted habit of our age is to think only in terms of large numbers and mass organizations.” Pg. 67
“And are not Jesus and Paul prototypes of those who, trusting their inner experience, have gone their own individual ways, disregarding public opinions?” Pg. 69
“The suffocating power of the masses is paraded before our eyes in one form or another every day in the newspapers, and the insignificance of the individual is rubbed into him so thoroughly that he loses all hope of making himself heard. The outworn ideals of liberté, égalité, fraternité help him not at all, as he can direct this appeal only to his executioners, the spokesmen of the masses.” Pg. 72
“You can take away a man’s gods, but only to give him others in return. The leaders of the mass State cannot avoid being deified, and wherever the crudities of this kind have not yet been put over by force, obsessive factors arise in their stead, charged with demonic energy – for instance, money, work, political influence, and so forth. When any natural human function gets lost, i.e., is denied conscious and intentional expressions, a general disturbance results. Hence, it is quite natural that with the triumph of the Goddess of Reason a general neuroticizing of modern man should set in, a dissociation of personality analogous to the splitting of the world today by the Iron Curtain.” Pg. 77
“Instincts, however, are highly conservative and of extreme antiquity as regards both their dynamism and their form. Their form, when represented to the mind, appears as an image which expresses the nature of the instinctive impulse visually and concretely, like a picture. … Instinct is anything but a blind and indefinite impulse, since it proves to be attuned and adapted to a definite external situation. This latter circumstance gives it its specific and irreducible form. Just as instinct is original and hereditary, so, too, its form is age-old, that is to say, archetypal. It is even older and more conservative than the body’s form.” Pg. 81
“The fact that our conscious activity is rooted in instinct and derives from it its dynamism as well as the basic features of its ideational forms has the same significance for human psychology as for all other members of the animal kingdom. Human knowledge consists essentially in the constant adaptation of the primordial patterns of ideas that were given us a priori. These need certain modifications, because, in their original form, they are suited to an archaic mode of life but not to the demands of a specifically differentiated environment. If the flow of instinctive dynamism into our life is to be maintained, as is absolutely necessary for our existence, then it is imperative that we remold these archetypal forms into ideas which are adequate to the challenge of the present.” Pg. 82
“The psychologist has come to see that nothing is achieved by telling, persuading, admonishing, giving good advice. He must also get acquainted with the details and have an authentic knowledge of the psychic inventory of his patient. He has therefore to relate to the individuality of the sufferer and feel his way into all the nooks and crannies of his mind, to a degree that far exceeds the capacity of a teacher or even of a directeur de conscience. His scientific objectivity, which excludes nothing, enables him to see his patient not only as a human being but also as a subhuman who is boundto his body, like an animal. The development of science has directed his interest beyond the range of the consciou personality to the world of unconscious instinct dominated by sexuality and the power drive (or self-assertion) corresponding to the twin moral concepts of Saint Augustine: concupiscentia and superbia. The clash between these two fundamental instincts (preservation of the species and self-preservation) is the source of numerous conflicts. They are, therefore, the chief object of moral judgment, whose purpose it is to prevent these instinctual collisions as far as possible.” Pp. 89-90
“As I explained above, instinct has two main aspects: on the one hand, that of dynamism, drive or drift, and on the other, specific meaning and intention. It is highly probable that all man’s psychic functions have an instinctual foundation as is obviously the case with animals.” Pg. 90
“Nothing has a more divisive and alienating effect upon society than this moral complacency and lack of responsibility, and nothing promotes understanding and rapprochement more than the mutual withdrawal of projections. This necessary corrective requires self-criticism, for one cannot just tell the other person to withdraw them. He does not recognize them for what they are, any more than one does oneself. We can recognize our prejudices and illusions only when, from a broader psychological knowledge of ourselves and others, we are prepared to doubt the absolute rightness of our assumptions and compare them carefully and conscientiously with the objective facts.” Pp. 114-115
“Recognition of the shadow, on the other hand, leads to the modesty we need in order to acknowledge imperfection. And it is just this conscious recognition and consideration that are needed wherever a human relationship is to be established. A human relationship is not based on differentiation and perfection, for these only emphasize the differences or call forth the exact opposite; it is based, rather, on imperfection, on what is weak, helpless and in need of support – the very ground and motive of dependence. The perfect has no need of the other, but weakness has, for it seeks support and does not confront its partner with anything that might force him into an inferior position and even humiliate him. This humiliation may happen only too easily where idealism plays too prominent a role.” Pp. 116-117
“Anyone who has insight into his own action, and has thus found access to the unconscious, involuntarily exercises an influence on his environment. The deepening and broadening of his consciousness produce the kind of effect which the primitives call ‘mana.’ It is an unintentional influence on the unconscious prestige, and its effect lasts only so long as it is not disturbed by consciousness.” Pg. 121
“I am neither spurred on by excessive optimism nor in love with high ideals, but am merely concerned with the fate of the individual human being – that infinitesimal unit on whom the world depends, and in whom, if we read the meaning of the Christian message aright, even God seeks his goal.” Pg. 125
February 24, 2017
The Undiscovered Self - C.G. Jung
Since the dawn of time man have always been on the hunt towards understanding and discovering himself. A topic that has occupied man’s minds for ages. In this compelling work, C.G Jung approaches the topic of individuality in such a unique way. Presenting the individual’s struggle for moral and spiritual integrity against the “mass psychology’ generated by political fanaticism, scientific materialism and technological triumphalism on a global scale.
- The Plight of the individual in modern society
Most people confuse “self-knowledge” with knowledge of their conscious ego personalities. Anyone who has any ego-consciousness at all takes it for granted that he knows himself. But the ego knows only its own contents (desires), not the unconscious (shadow-self) and its contents (dreams, visions and primordial images). In general, people measure their self-knowledge by what the average person in their social environment knows of himself, but not by the real psychic facts which are for the most part hidden from them...hidden by the rule of the state. To understand an individual human being, one must lay aside all scientific knowledge (universal statistical knowledge) of the average man and discard all theories in order to adopt a completely new and unprejudiced attitude towards him\her. Such a task of understanding can be only approached with a free and an open mind to vast realms of unique possibilities.
If statistical reality is the only reality, then it is the sole authority …Then the individual is bound to be a function of statistics and hence a function of the State or whatever abstract principle, in other words - a functioning unit of the state without any personal significance and can be compared to others.
- Religion as the counterbalance to mass-mindedness
Man, as a social being, cannot on the long run exist without a tie to the community; as a result he will never find the real justification for his existence, and his own spiritual and moral judgment, anywhere except in an extra-mundane principle (Meaning: beyond the physical world as religious beliefs – believe in God’s might and grace) capable of balancing the overpowering influence of external factors (External factors that quench the individual’s religious belief, thus his individuality). As Jung explains “The individual who is not anchored by God can offer no resistance on his own resources to the physical and moral blandishments of the world. For this, he needs the evidence of inner, transcendent experience which alone can protect him from the otherwise inevitable submersion in the mass. Merely intellectual or even moral insight into the stultification and moral irresponsibility of the mass man is a negative recognition only and amounts to not much more than a wavering on the road to the atomization of the individual. It lacks the driving force of religious conviction since it is merely rational.”
Religion, sole meaning, and purpose lie in the direct relationship of the individual to god. It’s evident purpose is to maintain the psychic balance. For this reason, he has always taken care that any difficult decision likely to have consequences for himself and others shall be rendered safe by suitable measures of religious nature (prayer).
The State, in turn, demands enthusiasm, self-sacrifice, and love towards itself, and if religion establishes the concept of the “fear of God”, then the dictator State takes good care to provide the necessary terror. in that process the state begins to slowly substitute the individuals own belief with that of the state. The state claim it offers protection against such terrors, but in truth, it only offers outer protection from the world. While religion offers both inner serenity (protection of the soul) and outer protection.
- The individual's understanding of himself
Man is the slave of the machines that he thought have conquered space and time for him, he is intimidated and endangered by the might of the war technique which is supposed to safeguard his physical existence; his spiritual and moral freedom. Finally, to add comedy to tragedy, this lord of the elements, hugs to his bosom notions which stamp his dignity as worthless and becomes a landmark of absurdity. All his achievements and possessions do not make him bigger; on the contrary, they diminish him to the lowest levels existence.
Without consciousness, there would practically speaking, be no world, for the world exists as such only in so far as it is consciously reflected and consciously expressed by a psyche. Consciousness is a precondition of being.
Naturally, society itself is composed of de-individualized persons, which makes them completely at the mercy of ruthless individualists. they band the society together into groups and organizations as much as they like – it is just this banding together and the resultant extinction of the individual personality that makes it succumb so readily to a dictator (Divide and conquer: فرق تسد). In the end, everything rests on the quality of the individual, but the fatally short-sighted habit of our age is to think only in terms of large numbers and mass organizations. It takes only one madman to drive the world crazy!
It's only too clear that if the individual is not truly regenerated in spirit (anchored by religion), society cannot be either, for society is the sum total of individuals in need of redemption. The salvation of the world consists in the salvation of the individual soul. (God helps those who help themselves: إن الله لا يغير ما بقوم حتى يغيروا ما بأنفسهم)
Didn't Prophet Abraham, Muses, Jesus and Muhammad (Peace be upon them), trusted their inner experience, and have gone through their own individual ways, disregarding public opinion?
It is time we asked ourselves exactly why and for what purpose we are lumping together in mass organizations and what constitutes the nature of own individual human being. This is hardly possible except through a new process of self-nourishment. Without self-knowledge, there can be no growth, compassion, and integrity. I would like to add in this matter the following “He who knows himself and made known their poverty and inability towards them self (accepted them self in weakness) knew God's self-esteem and his ability and his riches, so its self-knowledge first, and then the knowledge of God after –or- He who knows himself has indicated that he knew God grace and riches first then his self.”
- Individual Philosophical and psychological approach to life
Our philosophy is no longer a way of life, as it was in antiquity; it has turned into an exclusively intellectual and academic affair.
Virtually everything depends on the human soul and its functions. It should be worthy of all the attention we can give it when everyone admits that the weal and woe of the future will be decided and solely by the psychic changes in man.
Our loss of consciousness in our world is due primarily to the loss of instinct: "الفطرة", and the reason for this lies in the materialistic development of the human mind over the past eons. The more power man had over nature, the more his knowledge and skill went to his head and ego consciousness to control.
The seat of faith, however, is not consciousness but spontaneous religious experience, which brings the individual’s faith into immediate relation with God through instinct.
Since it is believed that man is what his consciousness knows of itself, he regards himself as harmless and so adds stupidity to iniquity. He does not deny that terrible things have happened and still go on happening, but it is always “the others” who do them. (Set blame on others, denying his self-weakness and faults)
Neglecting the conditions of our own nature, and denying the concept that we are tempted to do evil in this negligence is the first step of turning us into an instrument of evil. The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist. Not to mention our lack of insight that deprives us of the capacity to deal with evil.
Moral complacency and lack of responsibility are the sole reason for a divisive and alienated society; likewise, nothing promotes understanding and rapprochement more than the mutual withdrawal of projections (withdrawal from rash judgment, blame and prejudice opinions that shape of mass public opinion)
Recognition of the shadow (unconsciousness -self), on the other hand, leads to the modesty we need in order to acknowledge imperfection. A human relationship is not based on differentiation and perfection, for these only emphasize the differences or call forth the exact opposite; it is based, rather on imperfection, on what is weak, helpless and in need of support by the strong , helpful and rich – such is the very ground and motive of dependence. The perfect has no need of the other, but weakness has.
At the end happiness and serenity, of soul and meaningfulness of life – can be experienced only by the individual and not by a State, which, through a religious and spiritual understanding of the self (inner world) towards the world we live in and interact with our own consciousness (outer world).
"I am a symbol of my soul." C.G Jung
Unknown artist
Since the dawn of time man have always been on the hunt towards understanding and discovering himself. A topic that has occupied man’s minds for ages. In this compelling work, C.G Jung approaches the topic of individuality in such a unique way. Presenting the individual’s struggle for moral and spiritual integrity against the “mass psychology’ generated by political fanaticism, scientific materialism and technological triumphalism on a global scale.
- The Plight of the individual in modern society
Most people confuse “self-knowledge” with knowledge of their conscious ego personalities. Anyone who has any ego-consciousness at all takes it for granted that he knows himself. But the ego knows only its own contents (desires), not the unconscious (shadow-self) and its contents (dreams, visions and primordial images). In general, people measure their self-knowledge by what the average person in their social environment knows of himself, but not by the real psychic facts which are for the most part hidden from them...hidden by the rule of the state. To understand an individual human being, one must lay aside all scientific knowledge (universal statistical knowledge) of the average man and discard all theories in order to adopt a completely new and unprejudiced attitude towards him\her. Such a task of understanding can be only approached with a free and an open mind to vast realms of unique possibilities.
If statistical reality is the only reality, then it is the sole authority …Then the individual is bound to be a function of statistics and hence a function of the State or whatever abstract principle, in other words - a functioning unit of the state without any personal significance and can be compared to others.
- Religion as the counterbalance to mass-mindedness
Man, as a social being, cannot on the long run exist without a tie to the community; as a result he will never find the real justification for his existence, and his own spiritual and moral judgment, anywhere except in an extra-mundane principle (Meaning: beyond the physical world as religious beliefs – believe in God’s might and grace) capable of balancing the overpowering influence of external factors (External factors that quench the individual’s religious belief, thus his individuality). As Jung explains “The individual who is not anchored by God can offer no resistance on his own resources to the physical and moral blandishments of the world. For this, he needs the evidence of inner, transcendent experience which alone can protect him from the otherwise inevitable submersion in the mass. Merely intellectual or even moral insight into the stultification and moral irresponsibility of the mass man is a negative recognition only and amounts to not much more than a wavering on the road to the atomization of the individual. It lacks the driving force of religious conviction since it is merely rational.”
Religion, sole meaning, and purpose lie in the direct relationship of the individual to god. It’s evident purpose is to maintain the psychic balance. For this reason, he has always taken care that any difficult decision likely to have consequences for himself and others shall be rendered safe by suitable measures of religious nature (prayer).
The State, in turn, demands enthusiasm, self-sacrifice, and love towards itself, and if religion establishes the concept of the “fear of God”, then the dictator State takes good care to provide the necessary terror. in that process the state begins to slowly substitute the individuals own belief with that of the state. The state claim it offers protection against such terrors, but in truth, it only offers outer protection from the world. While religion offers both inner serenity (protection of the soul) and outer protection.
- The individual's understanding of himself
Man is the slave of the machines that he thought have conquered space and time for him, he is intimidated and endangered by the might of the war technique which is supposed to safeguard his physical existence; his spiritual and moral freedom. Finally, to add comedy to tragedy, this lord of the elements, hugs to his bosom notions which stamp his dignity as worthless and becomes a landmark of absurdity. All his achievements and possessions do not make him bigger; on the contrary, they diminish him to the lowest levels existence.
Without consciousness, there would practically speaking, be no world, for the world exists as such only in so far as it is consciously reflected and consciously expressed by a psyche. Consciousness is a precondition of being.
Naturally, society itself is composed of de-individualized persons, which makes them completely at the mercy of ruthless individualists. they band the society together into groups and organizations as much as they like – it is just this banding together and the resultant extinction of the individual personality that makes it succumb so readily to a dictator (Divide and conquer: فرق تسد). In the end, everything rests on the quality of the individual, but the fatally short-sighted habit of our age is to think only in terms of large numbers and mass organizations. It takes only one madman to drive the world crazy!
It's only too clear that if the individual is not truly regenerated in spirit (anchored by religion), society cannot be either, for society is the sum total of individuals in need of redemption. The salvation of the world consists in the salvation of the individual soul. (God helps those who help themselves: إن الله لا يغير ما بقوم حتى يغيروا ما بأنفسهم)
Didn't Prophet Abraham, Muses, Jesus and Muhammad (Peace be upon them), trusted their inner experience, and have gone through their own individual ways, disregarding public opinion?
It is time we asked ourselves exactly why and for what purpose we are lumping together in mass organizations and what constitutes the nature of own individual human being. This is hardly possible except through a new process of self-nourishment. Without self-knowledge, there can be no growth, compassion, and integrity. I would like to add in this matter the following “He who knows himself and made known their poverty and inability towards them self (accepted them self in weakness) knew God's self-esteem and his ability and his riches, so its self-knowledge first, and then the knowledge of God after –or- He who knows himself has indicated that he knew God grace and riches first then his self.”
- Individual Philosophical and psychological approach to life
Our philosophy is no longer a way of life, as it was in antiquity; it has turned into an exclusively intellectual and academic affair.
Virtually everything depends on the human soul and its functions. It should be worthy of all the attention we can give it when everyone admits that the weal and woe of the future will be decided and solely by the psychic changes in man.
Our loss of consciousness in our world is due primarily to the loss of instinct: "الفطرة", and the reason for this lies in the materialistic development of the human mind over the past eons. The more power man had over nature, the more his knowledge and skill went to his head and ego consciousness to control.
The seat of faith, however, is not consciousness but spontaneous religious experience, which brings the individual’s faith into immediate relation with God through instinct.
Since it is believed that man is what his consciousness knows of itself, he regards himself as harmless and so adds stupidity to iniquity. He does not deny that terrible things have happened and still go on happening, but it is always “the others” who do them. (Set blame on others, denying his self-weakness and faults)
Neglecting the conditions of our own nature, and denying the concept that we are tempted to do evil in this negligence is the first step of turning us into an instrument of evil. The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist. Not to mention our lack of insight that deprives us of the capacity to deal with evil.
Moral complacency and lack of responsibility are the sole reason for a divisive and alienated society; likewise, nothing promotes understanding and rapprochement more than the mutual withdrawal of projections (withdrawal from rash judgment, blame and prejudice opinions that shape of mass public opinion)
Recognition of the shadow (unconsciousness -self), on the other hand, leads to the modesty we need in order to acknowledge imperfection. A human relationship is not based on differentiation and perfection, for these only emphasize the differences or call forth the exact opposite; it is based, rather on imperfection, on what is weak, helpless and in need of support by the strong , helpful and rich – such is the very ground and motive of dependence. The perfect has no need of the other, but weakness has.
At the end happiness and serenity, of soul and meaningfulness of life – can be experienced only by the individual and not by a State, which, through a religious and spiritual understanding of the self (inner world) towards the world we live in and interact with our own consciousness (outer world).
"I am a symbol of my soul." C.G Jung
Unknown artist
December 20, 2008
This book is as timeless as human nature. Cases are made in favor of both freedom (delving into the strains of individuality posed by communism and socialism) and the soul (delving into the strains of individuality posed by over adhearance to most of society's organized religions), all through articulations centered around self knowledge.
Jung's main concept of self knowledge has to do with the power of the unconscious and the pulls from it's dark, simplistic instincts (one's shadow). Without self knowledge, the ever-present shadow continues to be ignored, perpetually becoming greater in its danger and influence. When faced with a situation that the conscious can't handle, the shadow comes out, typically resulting in negative actions. While these actions are acted out on an individual level, they collectively have broad social ramifications (a more powerful state, an unthinking and overly dogmatized religion, etc) all of which further inhibit the individual, creating a snowball effect.
Jung argues that we must recognize and deal with the evils of our shadows through honest introspection, and through states of individual being that are not influenced by mass groups. In this book he successfully demonstrates that if an individual is to thrive, he must be in touch with his full, undiscovered self.
Jung's main concept of self knowledge has to do with the power of the unconscious and the pulls from it's dark, simplistic instincts (one's shadow). Without self knowledge, the ever-present shadow continues to be ignored, perpetually becoming greater in its danger and influence. When faced with a situation that the conscious can't handle, the shadow comes out, typically resulting in negative actions. While these actions are acted out on an individual level, they collectively have broad social ramifications (a more powerful state, an unthinking and overly dogmatized religion, etc) all of which further inhibit the individual, creating a snowball effect.
Jung argues that we must recognize and deal with the evils of our shadows through honest introspection, and through states of individual being that are not influenced by mass groups. In this book he successfully demonstrates that if an individual is to thrive, he must be in touch with his full, undiscovered self.
January 18, 2022
The only thing I discovered reading this book is that Carl Jung is a moron ...
October 24, 2022
الكتاب اشبه بدعوة للتنقيب في اغوار النفس وليس معلومات عنها
February 7, 2016
یک کتاب سخت ترجمه شده. ولی از نظر تحلیلی و حرفایی که میزنه نسبتا جالب
July 26, 2022
... съвременният човек познава себе си само доколкото е способен да осъзнава себе си.
November 18, 2013
It is amazing how one, perplexed as it might be by our race, finds everything as plain as the back of his hand after reading this perfectly written book. It might sound like a cliché, but yes the message of this book is to make us aware of the importance of this overlooked infinitesimal dot on Earth: the individual.
I won't restate every crucial point made by Jung. Nevertheless, I would like to open up my thoughts about all the truths in this book, in brief.
For all what we have, for all the advancements, for all the knowledge we gained, we are the victims of an illusionary world in which we constructed the tyrannical ideas that would, for now and ever, take full control of us depriving us of our basic human right: self-knowledge
As populations grow, needs also increase. We begin squeezing our minds trying to find solutions to complex situations. As a result, we get advancements in technology, sciences, and economics that would aid us in taking on our voyage on Earth until human civilization is annihilated. However, as everything external grows and the need for professional aptness increases, our inner man, our unconscious, is shrouded by a dark, metallic veil. Self-discovery becomes obsolete and power is rendered the domain. We, as a result, succumb to the race's, or the mass as Jung prefers to name, demands which we aren't aware of the source form which they arose. Whether these demands are collective forces of the society or just contagious desires isn't really the case here; both ways lead to the tyranny that deprives the human being from self-discovery obscuring his desires and inclinations. Thus, we find our instincts faded and our personalities shaped to fit our society. Unfortunately, this process of corrosion leads to the rise of arbitrary political power and the neglect of the human soul.
Another disadvantage of this phenomenon is the obscurity in which it places religion. To make advancements we need to employ methods that are basically built on reason; however, as Jung said, reason alone does not suffice. The predominance of reason in our worldly life easily permeates through other "extra-mundane" issues. We give religion a look of suspicion trying to rationalize every aspect of it which is what the atheist does to become an atheist. The truth in this, however, is that we have to accept that some things transcend human-knowledge and that the core of religion, any religion, can contain mythological aspects that we can't work out. Rather than giving up on religion, which gives us inner power awakening the unconscious and giving the individual a golden ticket to his inner soul, we are supposed to hold tight to it.
After all, it is we who construct or destruct ourselves by will. We are capable of inspiring the unconscious guaranteeing ourselves the opportunity of change and are as capable of suppressing it by submerging in the "mass" until we break down with dissociation. It's all fifty-fifty inside us: evilness and kindness, happiness and sadness, not to mention other features. However, we have to choose which part of us we want to invest in. To do this, we need to know who we are.
I won't restate every crucial point made by Jung. Nevertheless, I would like to open up my thoughts about all the truths in this book, in brief.
For all what we have, for all the advancements, for all the knowledge we gained, we are the victims of an illusionary world in which we constructed the tyrannical ideas that would, for now and ever, take full control of us depriving us of our basic human right: self-knowledge
As populations grow, needs also increase. We begin squeezing our minds trying to find solutions to complex situations. As a result, we get advancements in technology, sciences, and economics that would aid us in taking on our voyage on Earth until human civilization is annihilated. However, as everything external grows and the need for professional aptness increases, our inner man, our unconscious, is shrouded by a dark, metallic veil. Self-discovery becomes obsolete and power is rendered the domain. We, as a result, succumb to the race's, or the mass as Jung prefers to name, demands which we aren't aware of the source form which they arose. Whether these demands are collective forces of the society or just contagious desires isn't really the case here; both ways lead to the tyranny that deprives the human being from self-discovery obscuring his desires and inclinations. Thus, we find our instincts faded and our personalities shaped to fit our society. Unfortunately, this process of corrosion leads to the rise of arbitrary political power and the neglect of the human soul.
Another disadvantage of this phenomenon is the obscurity in which it places religion. To make advancements we need to employ methods that are basically built on reason; however, as Jung said, reason alone does not suffice. The predominance of reason in our worldly life easily permeates through other "extra-mundane" issues. We give religion a look of suspicion trying to rationalize every aspect of it which is what the atheist does to become an atheist. The truth in this, however, is that we have to accept that some things transcend human-knowledge and that the core of religion, any religion, can contain mythological aspects that we can't work out. Rather than giving up on religion, which gives us inner power awakening the unconscious and giving the individual a golden ticket to his inner soul, we are supposed to hold tight to it.
After all, it is we who construct or destruct ourselves by will. We are capable of inspiring the unconscious guaranteeing ourselves the opportunity of change and are as capable of suppressing it by submerging in the "mass" until we break down with dissociation. It's all fifty-fifty inside us: evilness and kindness, happiness and sadness, not to mention other features. However, we have to choose which part of us we want to invest in. To do this, we need to know who we are.
Read
September 22, 2016خوشبختی و سعادت، تعادل روحی و با معنی بودن زندگی، اینها و همه چیز های دیگر، از راه تلاش فرد فرد مردم به وجود می آید، نه از راه دولت ها که از یک طرف چیزی جز قراردادی که افراد مستقل و آزاد به دور آن فراهم می آیند نخواهد بود؛ و از طرف دیگر دولت ها و قدرتمندی آنها همیشه باعث ضعف افراد بوده و هرچه قدرت آنها بیشتر شود خطر ازکار افتادن شخصیت افراد و تحت فشار قرار گرفتن آنها بیشتر می شود.
March 31, 2018
Underwhelming. Maybe It was my high expectations for this book that I found it 'okay' with no brilliant insights.
February 10, 2025
god, what a headache.
July 31, 2021
Years ago, perhaps in college, I bought Jung’s slim book. What could be more enticing than “The Undiscovered Self”? But it was completely incomprehensible to me. It was not until years later, after I had been exposed to psychotherapeutic jargon, that I could make sense of it. It’s an interesting book, one that makes a sound argument, and can be of use in helping one find one’s “undiscovered self.”
Jung starts off by saying that science, the political system and religious institutions all diminish the individual by operating on the basis of generalities. Science addresses the statistical norm, not the individual. Political systems, whether socialist or capitalist, democratic or totalitarian, operate in terms of the interests of classes of people, not the individual. And religious institutions define themselves in terms of creeds, which lose individual differences. The only alternative to this is respect for individual experience, which Jung sees as the source of novelty and value in the world. Jung describes such individual experience, which is the source of personal meaning, as religious experience (distinct from religious institutions).
To grasp individual experience, as a physician or a therapist might need to do, one needs both knowledge of the general and understanding of the particular. One must understand not only conscious experience, but also the unconscious, those instinctual responses related to sex and survival which have been superseded or suppressed by the conscious mind. The unconscious has a dark or shadow side, from which we dissociate ourselves, and which we project onto others, those we think least like ourselves. To experience our individual selves, instead of acting as social automatons, we need to recognize and process all aspects of ourselves, including the dark impulses we deny.
According to Jung, we will be at a permanent social impasse if we cannot recognize the shadow side of ourselves. Only if we can mobilize the resources of our unconscious to address the stultifying pressures of a mass culture, will we be able overcome our social differences and contribute something new to the world.
Jung’s book, published in 1957, seems particularly relevant to some contemporary discussions, such as the acknowledgement of the racism that has pervaded American history (and its denial). Though Jung makes reference to the 1956 protests in Hungary and Poland as examples of resistance to state power, his discussion seems applicable to the Trumpian age, in which different segments of society vilify each other. The polarization of society may be resolved by each individual exploring and acknowledging the shadow side of one’s own self.
Jung starts off by saying that science, the political system and religious institutions all diminish the individual by operating on the basis of generalities. Science addresses the statistical norm, not the individual. Political systems, whether socialist or capitalist, democratic or totalitarian, operate in terms of the interests of classes of people, not the individual. And religious institutions define themselves in terms of creeds, which lose individual differences. The only alternative to this is respect for individual experience, which Jung sees as the source of novelty and value in the world. Jung describes such individual experience, which is the source of personal meaning, as religious experience (distinct from religious institutions).
To grasp individual experience, as a physician or a therapist might need to do, one needs both knowledge of the general and understanding of the particular. One must understand not only conscious experience, but also the unconscious, those instinctual responses related to sex and survival which have been superseded or suppressed by the conscious mind. The unconscious has a dark or shadow side, from which we dissociate ourselves, and which we project onto others, those we think least like ourselves. To experience our individual selves, instead of acting as social automatons, we need to recognize and process all aspects of ourselves, including the dark impulses we deny.
According to Jung, we will be at a permanent social impasse if we cannot recognize the shadow side of ourselves. Only if we can mobilize the resources of our unconscious to address the stultifying pressures of a mass culture, will we be able overcome our social differences and contribute something new to the world.
Jung’s book, published in 1957, seems particularly relevant to some contemporary discussions, such as the acknowledgement of the racism that has pervaded American history (and its denial). Though Jung makes reference to the 1956 protests in Hungary and Poland as examples of resistance to state power, his discussion seems applicable to the Trumpian age, in which different segments of society vilify each other. The polarization of society may be resolved by each individual exploring and acknowledging the shadow side of one’s own self.
June 21, 2011
This book, contained in Volume 10 of The Collected Works of C.G. Jung, was one of the first I read, having found this cheap paperback in a used bookstore. A critique of mass culture, it may be read in reference both to Jung's early estimations of National Socialism in Germany--estimations he later qualified heavily--and to the Cold War which was at its height during the time of composition. Written for the general public (and published in The Atlantic), this essay is a light read and will not serve as an introduction to analytical psychology.
August 27, 2017
Wow this was not at all what I expected. I thought it would be about breaking down the individual mind into ego, id ect. Instead for the most part it's about groups of people and what drives their actions. Written during the height of the cold war much of the text deals with the west and communism but in truth is just as relevant in the USA today with the deep divides of the alt right and the far left.
February 6, 2021
Review to follow
Displaying 1 - 30 of 882 reviews