Carl Gustav Jung ?

Frans Tassigny

Description

"If people can be educated to see the lowly side of their own natures, it may be hoped that they will also learn to understand and to love their fellow men better. A little less hypocrisy and a little more tolerance towards oneself can only have good results in respect for our neighbor; for we are all too prone to transfer to our fellows the injustice and violence we inflict upon our own natures."
—Two Essays on Analytical Psychology: New Paths in Psychology, 1912
  [Moins]

Informations

• Publié par: Une-Universite-de-la-Psychanalyse
• Nombre de lectures: 39
• Langue: English

Extrait

JUNG

#10 - INFERIORITY COMPLEX

"Wherever an inferiority complex exists, there is a good reason for it." —Interview, 1943

#09 - COMPENSATING FACTORS

"The great problems of life—sexuality, of course, among others—are always related to the primordial images of the collective unconscious. These images are really balancing or compensating factors which correspond with the problems life presents in actuality. This is not to be marveled at, since these images are deposits representing the accumulated experience of thousands of years of

struggle for adaptation and existence." —Psychological Types, 1923

#08 - DREAMS

"The conscious mind allows itself to be trained like a parrot, but the unconscious does not—which is why St. Augustine thanked God for not making him responsible for his dreams." —Psychology and Alchemy, 1953

#07 - HIDDEN DOOR

"The dream is the small hidden door in the deepest and most intimate sanctum of the soul, which opens into that primeval cosmic night that was soul long before there was a conscious ego and will be soul far beyond what a conscious ego could ever reach." —The Meaning of Psychology for Modern Man, 1934

#06 - SHADOW

"Where love rules, there is no will to power; and where power predominates, there love is lacking. The one is the shadow of the other." —The Psychology of the Unconscious, 1943

#05 - EVERY FORM OF ADDICTION

"Every form of addiction is bad, no matter whether the narcotic be alcohol or morphine or idealism." —Memories, Dreams, ReLections, 1962

#04 - SOLE PURPOSE

"As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being." —Memories, Dreams, ReLections, 1962

#03 - PENDULUM

"The pendulum of the mind oscillates between sense and nonsense, not between right and wrong." —Memories, Dreams, ReLections, 1962

#02 - LOWLY SIDE

"If people can be educated to see the lowly side of their own natures, it may be hoped that they will also learn to understand and to love their fellow men better. A little less hypocrisy and a little more tolerance towards oneself can only have good results in respect for our neighbor; for we are all too prone to transfer to our fellows the injustice and violence we inict upon our own natures." —Two Essays on Analytical Psychology: New Paths in Psychology, 1912

#01 - THE ONLY REAL DANGER

"We need more understanding of human nature, because the only real danger that exists is man himself . . . We know nothing of man, far too little. His psyche should be studied because we are the origin of all coming evil." —BBC interview, 1959

User Comments -Add a Comment

Alan - 2008-08-10 14:36:23

One of the greatest minds of the 20th century and he certainly wasn't your usual psychologist. His greatness inspired me to become a psychologist.

Brian - 2008-08-13 14:38:09

These quotes make perfect sense to the FOOL who says their is no God

Fools within, fools without... - 2008-10-21 07:50:38

theirs is no god?

Carl - 2008-10-24 09:19:44

What about fools who missed "their" homonym lesson in grade three.

Vic - 2008-11-20 12:21:11

What??? How does one glean anything about the existence of a god in this material? God is an invention. Man is the source and cure for troubles caused by his lack of awareness and intellect. The brilliance of Carl Jung is lost if you begin to drift into the meaningless discussion of an invisible force that rules the universe. What's the point of doing or studying anything? God is for the primitive minds among us. It's for those who feel unworthy, lowly, fearful and confused.

Phil E. Drifter - 2008-12-31 21:24:52

Indeed, I'm glad to see, this is the îrst board I've ever seen on the web where atheists outnumber theists. God was an invention to explain the unexplainable in primitive man; then, as the great Bertrand Russell once said, "religion was created when the îrst scoundrel met the îrst fool." Belief in god, to paraphrase Richard Dawkins, is to take the cowards way out. (The paraphrasing ends here, the rest is my own.) To blindly throw up your arms and claim 'god did it' is to secede from rational thought on the presumption you can get away with it, never having to study science or math or 100 other îelds. Religitards make me incredibly angry.

Peter S. Lopez - 2009-02-15 14:53:27

We are still trying to absorb what he shared with us all.

Chris - 2009-07-18 03:05:08

I don't understand how atheists can deîne human nature or anything else as "evil" because if God does not exist, the saying goes, all things are permissable and violence is the natural order fo things. In a universe without ultimate reality, without objective truth, without God, what is more natural? The fact that mans corrupted nature and evil are a consistant concern throughout human history, across all religions and cultures, is very telling in my view.

Ranger - 2009-07-29 21:53:19

I completely agree Chris. The atheist is free to create a morality, meaning, hope or other metaphysical categories based on societal values, personal preference or whatever they so choose. After all, they are the ultimate authority in their paradigm. Dawkins understands this when at the end of the God Delusion he urges that we create our own meaning...which to him means continuing as a social Christian. The irony is that in the atheist paradigm, this created meaning or metaphysic is just as illusory as theistic belief. It has absolutely no metaphysical underpinnings and ails about with no grounding or direction.

Dave - 2009-09-08 13:47:57

So what exactly is the dierence between a person making up a god to explain the inexplicable, or making up a philosophy to explain the same thing? Or even a "scientiîc" theory? The hard fact is there is a lot that is entirely beyond our ability to comprehend, and people have a real diïculty saying, "I don't know. I'm working on it, but so far, I just don't know." Don't disparage the theists until you have had a good hard look at your own ideology. It may be based on entirely the same sort of reasoning.

Jacca - 2009-09-10 04:54:09

Dave, learn to research before spouting nonsense: "A theory, in the scientiîc sense of the word, is an analytic structure designed to explain a set of empirical observations. A scientiîc theory does two things: 1. it identiîes this set of distinct observations as a class of phenomena, and 2. makes assertions about the

underlying reality that brings about or aects this class. In the scientiîc or empirical tradition, the term "theory" is reserved for ideas which meet baseline requirements about the kinds of empirical observations made, the methods of classiîcation used, and the consistency of the theory in its application among members of the class to which it pertains. These requirements vary across dierent scientiîc îelds of knowledge, but in general theories are expected to be functional and parsimonious: i.e. a theory should be the simplest possible tool that can be used to eectively address the given class of phenomena." ~ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory A Theory is not a Hypothesis.

John - 2009-09-18 22:23:12

What I do not understand about atheists who profess to admire Jung is their seeming failure to appreciate that their conception of the God who does not exist is just as much a projection of the psyche as the conception of God possessed by believers. As a deep believer, I continue to be amazed at and baed by what atheists take to be God, and what they take to be the mindset of believers. In my experience, the concept of the numinous is liberating and comprises ultimate mystery and subtlety. Yet the thinking of the Dawkins crowd is simplistic, and as didactic as anything ever pronounced from the Vatican.

Craig - 2009-09-25 04:04:08

Then I'll help you understand Jon. Your fallacy is in not realising that atheists have no "conception of the God who does not exist". We have no belief in *any* god, there is no need to deîne each god in which we disbelieve. The only time an atheist might deîne a god is when talking to a believer in that particular god - but that is not the basis of our disbelief. "... the concept of the numinous is liberating and comprises ultimate mystery and subtlety." That is an *aect* it is having on you. It says nothing about reality. "Yet the thinking of the Dawkins crowd is simplistic, and as didactic as anything ever pronounced from the Vatican." Yet you fail to provide any examples. I can equally assert that what you have written here seems simplistic to me. But it is just that - an assertion.

Nick - 2009-10-10 21:32:50

In my mind, both atheism and theism are both diering ways in which individuals try to understand the forces at work in our universe that are beyond the understand of the vast majority.In both cases, the participants put their faith into a process that they feel is correct. Ultimately they are two dierent approaches to the same question of how everything works and what is our place in the universe, if we have one at all.

Anonymous - 2009-11-21 20:31:00

Where is no god? Who's god? their god!- See, that's what that complete idiot meant.

Anonymous - 2009-12-06 12:40:06

We were created 5 minutes ago with all our memories by God. Prove me wrong.

Anthony - 2010-01-15 02:50:39

"It's for those who feel unworthy, lowly, fearful and confused." Then isn't it reasonable to assume that the idea of God might be a necessity? Karl Marx once said religion was an opiate for the masses. What does most of the world need, a realistic view of the world? Realistically most of the world sucks. Most people are îne living their lives as long as they are happy. And sacriîcing logic for happiness could already be why religion exists. Would you lie to yourself to be happy?

James - 2010-01-17 01:28:28

another wonderful article ruined by a ridiculous theological debate. *sigh* um. I'm an INFP! Carl Jung, Woo!

Lloyd - 2010-02-20 15:30:43

I agree, don't argue with people who won't listen. Watch them to make sure they don't fuck everything up, and let them die out. If they wish to be sheeple, we are the shepherds.

Craig - 2010-03-03 19:03:26

NICK: "In my mind, both atheism and theism are both diering ways in which individuals try to understand the forces... In both cases, the participants put their faith into a process that they feel is correct." Although that is your opinion, atheism is a lack of belief in a particular claim - it is not a 'way' to understand forces. Secondly, the atheist does not "put faith into a process", nor does the scientist. Objective natural methodology does not require faith - theism does. This sounds like another insipid middle-ground attempt to pretend that you can perceive the position of both 'ends', without yourself being subject to those obserations.

God - 2010-03-15 16:30:06

Chill out about the God argument. Theists got shafted because the îrst person spelled there wrong. Their (haha) should be more comments on how bad ass dreams are.

Mark - 2010-04-17 12:41:51

Jung is clearly over the atheists heads anyway.

tdfd - 2010-06-20 01:20:11

^^i agree oneirology is fascinating. i absolutely love the ways jung writes about dreaming.

Rion - 2010-06-23 14:58:06

Mark: "Jung is clearly over the atheists heads anyway." Evidence? Does Jung appeal to the kind of person who makes sweeping generalisations?

Denny - 2010-09-08 06:49:55

Those who believe there is no God, in my view, are bereft of humility. There is scientiîc evidence of God. If the "Big Bang Theory" is accepted as the scientiîc explanation of how "IT" got here, all of this, there had to be an Original First Cause. IT didn't just happen. God is the Original Cause.

Savanna - 2010-10-18 20:44:35

I've been reading "The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious" and Jung repeatedly implies that religion and mythology are all a product of the collective unconscious, and that they are imagined. So to those who claim that these quotes involve God in any way, you might want to actually read his work before making assumptions.

Mr. Ed - 2010-11-23 20:00:53

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJ25Ai__FYU

Harry - 2010-12-25 22:03:10

Theists believe that God exists and atheists believe that God does not exist. Both groups are believers. And yet, Carl Jung stated, "when we have a relationship to a particular thing or experience with it, belief, faith ceases to be a factor. The truth is this, I have had the experience of being gripped by something that is stronger than myself, something that people call God. So, I will never say that I believe that God exists. I must say I know God exists." I have had a similar experience in my life, so do these moments qualify as evidence? From my experience, I can assure you that God and the human animal practice of religion are two dierent things entirely.

Harry Squared - 2011-01-10 03:24:16

You tell 'em Harry.

maijala - 2011-02-07 19:50:02

One sentence quotes, especially when taken out of context, do not reveal the meaning. Read Jung; speciîcally Philosophy and Religion, and it will become clear that Jung believed "god" to be a human archetype.

george saul - 2011-02-17 15:21:38

The sons of 'light and darkness' came together to îght 'ignorance'? God is love, that is, balaced ojectivity, jurispudance, thoughtful actions that is righteousness and understanding,that is standing under the aupices/ guidance of our lord and God whoever they may be? Amen. Without extremes we all become free?

Intio - 2011-03-09 19:36:20