Skip to content

“1492-911-?”

April 4, 2017

Investigate Jung’s Archetypal Psychology & Western one-sided cultural shadow of false flag gender violence.

145bx

http://www.nyspirit.com/local-wellness-directory/paul-stein-lmsw-ph-d-holistic-analysis/

Cf. BIBLIOGRAPHY

(Jung, “The World Within, In His Own Words,” http://youtu.be/O67a8_XXqK4)

“American life is…so one-sided. The natural man and woman are just in open rebellion against the utterly inhuman form of life”  Jung

“We think we are able to be born today and live in no myth and without history…that is a mutilation of the human being” – Jung

“A man who has not passed through the inferno of his passions has never overcome them” – Jung …”or silenced his responsibility to know them” – Pls

“The psychological rule says that when an inner situation is not made conscious, it happens outside as fate.  That is to say when the individual remains undivided and does not become conscious of his (or her) inner opposite, the world must perforce act out the conflict and be torn into opposing haves.”  Jung, Word and Image, 216

“One does not become enlightened by imaging things of light but my making the darkness conscious” (Jung)

“Men (and women-ps) have always lived in the myth and we think we are able to be born today and live in no myth and without history….That is a mutilation of the human being….American life is in subtle ways so one-sided.  The real natural man (and woman-ps) is just in open rebellion against the utterly inhuman form of life….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 seeking‘redemption.’” (Jung, The Undiscovered Self )

“The same archetypal pattern that projects the undifferentiated mythic totality of “Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order” that created ‘911’ ‘yesterday’ continues to create ‘it’ ‘today’” (Pls) http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14046

“The archetype—let us never forget this—is a psychic organ present in all of us.  A bad explanation means a corresponding bad attitude to this organ, which may thus be injured…For the archetype is an element of our psychic structure and thus a vital and necessary component in our psychic economy.  It represents or personifies certain instinctive data of the dark, (ancestral) psyche,  the real but invisible roots of consciousness….Since the unconscious is the psyche of all the body’s autonomous functional complexes, its ‘fantasies’ have an etiological significance that is not to be despised.” (Jung, C.G. and Kerenyi, C. Essays on a Science of Mythology; The Myth of the Divine Child and the Mysteries of Eleusis, 79, 91).

“It is as if we did not know, or else continually forget that everything of which we are conscious is an image, and that image is psyche.” (Jung)

“We are the great danger.  Psyche is the great danger. How important it is to know something about it.  But we know nothing about it….A child is not born a tabula rasa as one assumes.  A child is born a high complexity with existing determinants that never waiver through the whole life, that gives the child his (or her) character….We are born into a(n) (archetypal) pattern.  We are a pattern.  We are a structure that is pre-established through the genes. It is a biological order of our mental functioning, as for instance our biological or physiological function follows a pattern, or the behavior of any bird or insect follows a pattern, and that is the same with us.  Man (and woman-ps) have a certain pattern that makes (them) specifically human, and no man (or woman) is born without it, we are only deeply unconscious of these facts because we live all by our senses and outside of our selves.  If a man (and a woman) could look into (themselves they) would discover it.” (Jung, “The World Within, In His Own Words,” http://youtu.be/O67a8_XXqK4)

“The psychological rule says that when an inner situation is not made conscious, it happens outside as fate.  That is to say when the individual remains undivided and does not become conscious of his (or her) inner opposite, the world must perforce act out the conflict and be torn into opposing haves.” (Jung, Word and Image, 216)

“The dark depths of the unconscious are no longer to be denied by ignorance and sophistry—at best a poor disguise for common fear—nor are they to be explained away with pseudo-scientific rationalizations.  On the contrary it must now be admitted that things exist in the psyche about which we know little or nothing at all, but which nevertheless affect our bodies in the most obstinate way, and that they possess at least as much reality as the things of the physical world which ultimately we do not understand either.  No line of research which asserted that its subject was unreal or a ‘nothing but’ has ever made any contribution to knowledge.”  (Jung, Dreams, 165)    

“Loss of soul amounts to a tearing loose of part of one’s nature; it is the disappearance and emancipation of a complex, which thereupon becomes a tyrannical usurper of consciousness, oppressing the whole man (and woman).  It throws him (and her) off course and drives (them) to actions whose blind one-sidedness inevitably leads to self-destruction.” (Jung, Aspects of the Feminine, 10).

“There is no ‘new birth’ without a conscious realization of psyche’s projected archetypal opposite shadow in a whole man and woman.” (Pls)

“Wholeness…if it is to fulfill its purpose, needs all parts of the whole, including those that are projected into a ‘You.’” (Jung)

“In Archetypal Psychological terms: Literal personal historic one-sided superior ignorant rational defensive ego does not project; ‘psyche’s’ deeply unconscious, archetypally patterned, symbolic impersonal, numinous emotional, libidinal autonomous, mythic-body shadow of creation mythos projects its image of a potential differentiated and re-embodied original whole man and woman.  The link to relate ego and the ‘unconscious,’ spirit and body, intellect and instinct, ‘fire’ and ‘water,’ ‘earth’ and ‘air’ is ‘psyche’ or soul in Greek.  ‘Relationship’ or birthright assumes no consciousness of ‘psyche’s archetypal ly inherited’ ‘supreme mythic parenting opposite shadow of projected ‘whoelenss’ or ‘new birth.’  It was and is for that reason the “Rites of Passage” and “Healing traditions,” transliterated over time into dream analysis of the ‘transference phenomena’ were created.

“The underlying idea of the psyche proves it to be a half bodily, half spiritual substance, an anima media natura…an hermaphroditic being capable of uniting the opposites, but who is never complete in the individual unless related to another individual.  The unrelated human being lacks wholeness, for he (or she) can achieve wholeness only through the soul, and the soul cannot exist without its other side, which is always found in a ‘You.’ Wholeness is a combination  of I and You, and these show themselves to be parts of a transcendent unity whose nature can only be grasped symbolically….I do not, of course, mean the synthesis or identification of two individuals, but the conscious union of the ego with everything that has been projected into the ‘You.’ Hence wholeness is the product of an intrapsychic process which depends essentially on the relation of one individual to another.  Relationship paves the way for individuation and makes it possible, but is itself no proof of wholeness.  The projection upon the feminine partner contains the anima and sometimes the self.” (Jung, The Practice of Psychotherapy; Essays on the Transference Phenomena and other Subjects, 244-245)….How many marriages are wrecked for years, and sometimes forever, because he sees his mother in his wife and she her father in her husband, and neither ever recognizes the other’s reality.” (Ibid., 219)

“Every creative person is a duality or a synthesis of contradictory aptitudes. On the one side (a man and a woman) is a human being with a personal life while on the other side (they are) an impersonal, creative process…The ‘artist’ is not a person endowed with free will who seeks his (or her) own ends, but one who allows art to realize its purposes through (him or her). As a human being (they) may have moods and a will and personal aims, but as an ‘artist’ he is ‘man’ (and she is ‘woman’)—in a higher (or whole) sense—(they are a) ‘collective man’ (and woman)—one who carries and shapes the unconscious, psychic life of mankind. To perform this difficult office it is sometimes necessary for (them) to sacrifice happiness and everything that makes life worth living for the ordinary human being.” (Jung, “Modern Man in Search of Soul”).

“Each life is formed by its unique image, an image that is the essence of that life and calls it to a destiny. This image acts as a personal daimon, an accompanying guide who remembers your calling. The daimon motivates. It protects. It invents and persists with stubborn fidelity. It resists compromising reasonableness. It offers comfort and can pull you into its shell, but it cannot abide innocence. It is out of step with time.” (James Hillman)

“As we are human beings, we have an identity of culture; we are the shadow of the spiritual power of human life”  (Leonard Crow Dog)

“Since it is only thorugh individual men and women that ‘culture’ is created, analysis of psyche’s projected archetypal shadow in a potential whole man and woman is an unfolding  ‘dialogical partnership’ of co-creativity and gendered distinct movement toward a ‘therapy of culture.’  That ‘dialogical partnership’ embodies the imaginal basis of ‘our’ ‘constitutional democracy’ ‘in-service’ to the ‘worldsoul’ around and in us that is subjectively and objectively related and gendered distinct ‘at once’ in ‘wholeness.’ (Pls)

As Jung notes in “Symbols of Transformation,” 7: “As most people know, one of the basic principles of analytical psychology is that dream-images are to be understood symbolically; that is to say, one must not take them literally, but must surmise a hidden meaning in them. This ancient idea of dream symbolism has aroused not only criticism, but the strongest opposition. That dreams should have a meaning, and should therefore be capable of interpretation, is certainly neither a strange nor an extraordinary idea. It has been known to mankind for thousands of years….For modern (men and women) it is hardly conceivable that a God existing outside ourselves should cause us to dream, or that the dream foretells the future prophetically. But if we translate this into the language of psychology, the ancient idea becomes much more comprehensible. The dream, we would say, originates in an unknown part of the psyche and prepares the dreamer for the events of the following day….According to the old belief, a god or demon spoke to the sleeper in symbolic language, and the dream-interpreter had to solve the riddle. In modern speech we would say that the dream is a series of images which are apparently contradictory and meaningless, but that it contains material which yields a clear meaning when properly translated.”

As James Hillman states: “Archetypal Psychology deliteralizes the notion of ego and focuses on what it calls the psyche, or soul.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archetypal_psychology.  See also “The Myth of Analysis: Three Essays in Archetypal Psychology” http://www.amazon.com/The-Myth-Analysis-Archetypal-Psychology/dp/0810116510

“No one can be in the world, with the world, and with others and maintain a posture of neutrality….Intellectuals who memorize everything, reading for hours on end, slaves to the text, fearful of taking a risk, speaking as if they were reciting from memory, fail to make any concrete connections between what they have read and what is happening in the world, the country, or the local community. They repeat what has been read with precision but rarely teach anything of personal value….I am not impartial or objective; not a  fixed observer of facts and happenings….I cannot be in the world decontextualized, simply observing life….Teacher preparation should go beyond the technical preparation of teachers  and be rooted in the ethical formation both of selves and of history….I feel it is necessary to overcome the false separation between serious  teaching and the expression of feeling….Critical reflection on practice is a requirement of the relationship between theory and practice. Otherwise theory becomes simply ‘blah, blah, blah,’ and practice, pure activism….As a strictly human experience, I could never treat education as something cold, mental, merely technical, and without soul, where feelings, sensibility, desires, and dreams had no place, as if repressed by some kind of reactionary dictatorship. In addition, I never saw educative practice as an experience that could be considered valid if it lacked rigor and intellectual discipline.”…. (Paulo Freire: “dialogue, praxis and education” http://infed.org/mobi/paulo-freire-dialogue-praxis-and-education/  http://www.truthout.org/10309_Giroux_Freire).

Advertisements

From → Uncategorized

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: