Kyle’s Reviews > Jung and Education: Elements of an Archetypal Pedagogy > Status Update
Kyle
is on page 123 of 220
It is both a relief and a revelation to read another scholar and educator who can frame the role of the teacher in the context of Jungian archetypes, equating the goal of learning a more holistic process of individualization. Of course, it is a goal not often achieved since a majority of teachers are thinking extrovert-types, and worse yet have a habit of insisting their learners become this way too. So, ten pillars!
— May 02, 2019 09:04AM
Like flag
Kyle’s Previous Updates
Kyle
is on page 179 of 220
The second half of the book shift away from Jung (still there in spirit) as Mayes brings the focus on his teaching practice and beliefs that are based upon the archetypal teacher-student dynamic that can go to some shadowy places. Front and centre are his spiritual beliefs, as if Mayes gets the thumbs up from Jung to preach what he practices with enough modesty to know neither he nor Jung should cross the dogma line.
— May 06, 2019 09:17PM
Kyle
is on page 53 of 220
Hard to imagine that, as of the publishing date in 2005, this book was the only scholarly connection between Jungian psychology and pedagogy in the K-12 school system. Much of the earlier chapters take Jung’s side against his predecessor, the assumed father figure Freud but it may just be me transferring my fascination for the former to indifference for the latter. Mayes seems to have a spiritual angle to his advice.
— Apr 23, 2019 10:30PM
