Re: Four Circles/Complementary paths of individuation

[Guest guest]

(You should have replied to the thread " Complementary paths of individuation " )

I checked it again. The excerpt is indeed from paragraph 761. In my edition of

Psychological Types, it is on page 449.

Note that I approbate Jung's view of individuation. Yet, I point out that it

runs into difficulties, anyway. That's why I argue that his definition, albeit

*correct*, needs another *correct* definition as a complement.

According to Jung, adaptation to the collective is essential to individuation.

The problem is that all late manifestations of culture are neurotic. This is a

notorious theme in fairytales interpreted by M-L von Franz. The consequence is

that the individuant, since he adapts to the collective, must needs be smitten

with neurosis.

We also know that Jung, true to his view of individuation, made an effort to

adapt to the Nazi collective. He traveled to Germany and held speeches. He

assumed overall responsibility for the Zentralblatt für Psychotherapie, which

had Nazi leanings. Until 1939, he maintained professional relations with

psychotherapists in Germany who had declared their support for the Nazi regime.

He has been subjected to much critique for his standpoint of adaptation towards

the Nazi regime. This does not mean that Jung believed in the Nazi system. His

writings are essentially anti-fascist. But my argument is that the adaptive

attempt, versus a neurotic collective, is doomed to failure.

Arguably, he should have adopted the stance of the pillar saint, which

represents the complementary form of individuation, according to which the

individuant takes exception to the collective, climbs a pillar, and refuses to

be smitten by collective neurosis.

But Jung was extremely averse to pillar sainthood, because his view of the self

was essentially this-worldly. The notion of transcending the rumpus of the world

was foreign to him.

Of course, the pillar saint is a rather extreme phenomenon. Not all recluses in

history went to these extremes. But it finely illustrates my point. Much like

Jung, modern people tend to look with scorn at the figure of the pillar saint.

They tend to think of this phenomenon as narcissistic. But it is a projection,

as they think of the saint as elevating himself and placing himself on a pillar.

It is really modern people who are prone to narcissism. In fact, the saint is

showing his own wretchedness to everyone. He is not sitting there like a king in

royal garment, but as the Man of Sorrows fastened on the tree. It is really a

form of 'imitatio Christi'.

The stylists spent years of their lives sitting on a pillar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stylites

St Simeon Stylites was fed up with world and wanted to distance himself from it.

Bunuel made a film about him, " Simon of the Desert " , in which the devil, in

the form of a beautiful woman, tries to tempt the saint down. Evidently, Bunuel

identified with the stylite. He was fed up with the superficial ways of the

world and wanted to climb a pillar. Much like the pillar saint, he experienced

that external reality was in the process of invading his private world, making

him neurotic, too. So he wanted to escape the world. This was how Bunuel felt in

face of popular culture, that annoyed him immensely.

My proposal is that the transcendent self is equally relevant as the immanent

self, but not simultaneously. In my article, I discuss Jung's dream, in which

appears the " pillar saint " Uriah, elevated in a high position. In this dream

appears also the immanent self in the form of Sultan Akbar:

http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/jungdream.htm

Arguably, Jung's own unconscious tried to accommodate the transcendent self

withing his self conception, which was lopsided because it included only Sultan

Akbar. However, when bending before Uriah, Jung's head didn't quite touch the

floor. I have proposed the interpretation that he would remain defiant, refusing

to admit that he was in the wrong. Jung bent down to Uriah, because he knew the

enormous impact of the Christian spirit. But he wouldn't concede to the

truthfulness of the transcendental conception of the self. Be that as it may; as

a whole, I think the dream elevates the transcendental self, thus compensating

Jung's position in the matter.

Mats Winther

>

> Matts,

> The quotes you present from Jung are out of context for

> me.  While I have a copy of Psychological

> Types, I have no way of finding the part you quote.  The first quote from The

Symbolic Life doesn’t

> read like a “definition†of individuation to me, but more like the

explanation

> of a quandary one may face if they rely on the collective for approval and

> self-worth.  Also, Jung seems to make the

> same argument you’re making in the quote from Psychological Types.  He says

conflict only arises when an

> individual way is raised to a norm, a norm that is defined by the collective.

  The collective appears to celebrate people

> who achieve any degree of individuation all the while absorbing them back into

> the collective.  (How they love to

> crucify the rich and famous)  The only

> force that suppresses individuation is the gravity exerted by the collective,

> and the only way to resist being reabsorbed is not to rely on the collective

> for self-esteem.  Jung is agreeing with

> you when you point out how absurd it would be for a Jew in Nazi Germany to

> chime in with the ruling (collective) ideology.  That’s exactly what he’s

saying when in the last line he states “The more a man's life is shaped by the

collective norm, the

> greater is individual immorality "    Where's the argument?   On the

> other hand, only when one has truly embraced evil, as Jung points out in Liber

> Secundus, will one attain this " self of completeness " you talk about.  If the

Jew was a truly enlightened individual,

> he might chime in.

> Thawstone

>

[Guest guest]

I think I would have to argue, as indeed Jung did in his own apologia re: the

Nazi business, that his dealings with the Nazi regime were prudential rather

than neurotic. He was trying to help German psychiatry cope with a bad

situation, to the degree to which it admitted of being coped with. You can 't

control fortune, of course. Like you, I can 't see him doing the pillar saint

thing, waiting to be shot full of arrows - it 's much too Christian and I do

think too narcissistic for Jung. Too " afterworldly, " imo. I always want to tell

those saints to get over themselves. Jung was too much of a classicist, with

classical virtues, and too little of a Christian for that sort of thing.

I guess I would add that one can adapt to the collective without buying into its

myths all the way. It is not necessary, nor necessarily even good, to shout the

truth in the streets.

best regards,

Dan Watkins

> >

> > Matts,

> > The quotes you present from Jung are out of context for

> > me.  While I have a copy of Psychological

> > Types, I have no way of finding the part you quote.  The first quote from

The Symbolic Life doesn’t

> > read like a “definition†of individuation to me, but more like the

explanation

> > of a quandary one may face if they rely on the collective for approval and

> > self-worth.  Also, Jung seems to make the

> > same argument you’re making in the quote from Psychological Types.  He

says conflict only arises when an

> > individual way is raised to a norm, a norm that is defined by the

collective.   The collective appears to celebrate people

> > who achieve any degree of individuation all the while absorbing them back

into

> > the collective.  (How they love to

> > crucify the rich and famous)  The only

> > force that suppresses individuation is the gravity exerted by the

collective,

> > and the only way to resist being reabsorbed is not to rely on the

collective

> > for self-esteem.  Jung is agreeing with

> > you when you point out how absurd it would be for a Jew in Nazi Germany to

> > chime in with the ruling (collective) ideology.  That’s exactly what

he’s saying when in the last line he states “The more a man's life is shaped

by the collective norm, the

> > greater is individual immorality "    Where's the argument?   On the

> > other hand, only when one has truly embraced evil, as Jung points out in

Liber

> > Secundus, will one attain this " self of completeness " you talk about.  If

the Jew was a truly enlightened individual,

> > he might chime in.

> > Thawstone

> >

>

[Guest guest]

I often disagree enough with you, Dan, to not answer your posts but this one? I'm with ya, brother! LOL

Blissings,Sam http://sampatron.wordpress.comSearch for SoulJust because I believe something doesn't mean it's true.Just because I don't believe something doesn't mean it's not true. ~ SamDon't believe everything you think. ~ KidaIn all affairs it's a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted. ~Bertrand We cannot live the afternoon of life according to the program of life's morning; for what in the morning was true will in evening become a lie. -- C.G. Jung

I guess I would add that one can adapt to the collective without buying into its myths all the way. It is not necessary, nor necessarily even good, to shout the truth in the streets.

[Guest guest]

Dan,My longtime Jung list colleague and sparring partner Dan finally offered a view able to set me to a response. Although, my response isn't about Dan's view, " that Jung was a classicist, etc.. " That just got me to throw a few shards against the cork.

As always, my own perspective is not that of Jungian. As much as I've secured a bit of understanding of the good doctor, it is in the light of the sweep of psychology, especially in the fifty+ years since Jung left. So, caveats may accrue.

I mention this because the Analytic Psychological in its classical form is not in the shape of an objective framework and thus Jung's total understanding, even if it had been purportedly absolutely comprehensive would have, nevertheless, been incomplete, missing this objective aspect as well as all sorts of other nameable aspects. I'll name two: Jung never mentions much about learning or fun.

My comments are in this context. On the other hand, I disagree with the proposition that some vital path has been left out.***From my understanding, more to the center of individuation in the structural sense are the conceptions of unconsciousness, attitude, and, compensation. For me, given this view, the ramifications of the collective " as against the individual " are secondary. In the current discussion, it seems to me the dichotomy between individual and collective are flat and overly reified--as if the former is necessarily vaunted and the latter is necessarily deprecated.

My suggestion here is to fall back on the basic structural framework by which a simple qualification of " path " is possible. This qualification is fundamental: how one-sided is the person's attitude?

If the observation is that the attitude of the subject is, for example, " turned totally inward; austere; rigorously introspective; sharply meditative, " then the further bloom of qualification would be: in this person's psychological development, how are these behaviors reflecting the compulsion of a compensation (of this kind/type,) in this particular situation of unconsciousness?

Lots of material shaped by the levels of the so-called collective--stretched as they would be in a particular person's situation between contemporary and primitive aspects--would be brought to the surface by this second question.

Yet, there is no path of individuation left behind given an analysis centered on these basic structural elements. Another consequence of this is that individuation " proper " is in this light about an endless gyre of growth (or regression) winding around recapitulations and 'breaking through' and of encountering old problems in other pitches, so-to-speak.

In all this, the part of " collective " is discoverable as psychological material, maybe symbolized or otherwise manifested by the most primal collective material, the archetypes, that cannot be completely grasped; anyway.

In this view, I lean on Mysterium Coniunctionis, and Dourley's and Eddinger's commentaries focused on Jung's critique of Christianity. In essence, I'm suggesting that the mature Jung's alchemical perspective offers a cogent analytical framework for inspecting any and every pathway of individuation.

Nothing is left out because this is all purpose in that the first analytic question would be: is the attitude per force development cum behavior one-sided to some degree?(The alchemical framework would then be purposeful in marking where this particular developmental instance is located in the alchemical schema. See Jung's discussion of Dorn and the re-uniting of the unis mentalis in Mysterium Coniuntionis, in the chapter The Conjunction.)

So it would be possible to employ the analytic relationship to flesh out the consequential compensation given in obviously one-sided forms of, for example, retreating inward away from the impress of the raw external collective.  Eventually, the (meta) problem of the collective, ('contra-individuality') would be required to heat up and pressurize the inwardly focused subject, and, for example, bring him or her back into his or her fragile body and back into vulnerable life vis-a-vis the normal constitutive features of 'being of the world.'

....conjoined to this.***Dan reminds me, once again, that in the strict view of Jung, most people would be consigned to figuring out how to reconcile the problem of their own personality. " This may mean learning how not to unintentionally drop poison in the world. " You get the flavor in this characterization of the problem of the Shadow with respect to the world of other souls; to the so-called collective.

Whereas, the pathways of individuation which are unfolded having accomplished this--the higher order problem of the primitive Shadow; the response to the psychoid manifestation and differentiation of the contra-sexual archetype; the submission to the integrity of the Psychopomp, and release from same--also are implicated in both the gyre of the endless teleo-alchemical view, and, in the more assimilable idea that any severe one-sidedness, be this for example addiction or cathartic introspection, is potentially a way station prior to transformation and equilibrium--and then on, again, into some other or the next " religious problem. "

This may bring us around the circle back to: 'being who one is really to be.'regards, in Clepheland---------------------------------------------------------squareone-learning.com

squareone-learning.com/blog/the entire 'kit and kaboodle'squareone-learning.com/blog/my-outposts/

[Guest guest]

>

> I often disagree enough with you, Dan, to not answer your posts but this

> one? I'm with ya, brother! LOL

>

> Blissings,

> Sam_ http://sampatron.wordpress.com_ (http://www.sampatron.wordpress.com/)

> Search for Soul

>

> Just because I believe something doesn't mean it's true.

> Just because I don't believe something doesn't mean it's not true. ~ Sam

> Don't believe everything you think. ~ Kida

> In all affairs it's a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark

> on the things you have long taken for granted. ~Bertrand

> We cannot live the afternoon of life according to the program of life's

> morning; for what in the morning was true will in evening become a lie. --

> C.G. Jung

>

>

>

> In a message dated 7/28/2012 03:08:51 Central Daylight Time,

> dwatkins9@... writes:

>

> I guess I would add that one can adapt to the collective without buying

> into its myths all the way. It is not necessary, nor necessarily even good,

> to shout the truth in the streets.

>

We aim to please.

best,

Dan

[Guest guest]

Gees sorry Dan, I totally misunderstood you.

I now understand your comment. Thanks for clarifying.

Yes I agree that to be manly today is not considered a virtue.

Ok I read ya!

I have seen strap on breasts available that can be filled

with woman's milk. Thus the man of today can wear it

when its his turn to feed the baby.

Steve

Re: Four Circles/Complementary paths of individuation

Sigh. Sometimes I wonder if I am even speaking the same language as other people. Steve, my purpose was not to bash Jung, but to praise him. In particular, in the post to which you allude, I was praising his manliness - a virtue or collection of virtues seemingly in some ill repute these days. Hence the comparison to Hemmingway who, drunkard or not, was manly. Of course, in other respects Jung far outshone Hemingway, who was after all a mere poet.Of course my remarks about Jung as political philosopher have nothing to do with National Socialism - the notion that Jung was somehow a Nazi sympathizer is perfectly absurd and unworthy of our attention. Jung's doings with Nazi officials were strictly prudential, as I stated before. Imo Jung's political thought can be justly described as classical, although if you wanted to claim it was more medieval, I suppose you would have a talking point. I would argue that Jung might have agreed with another writer who said that "the small city-state is in principle superior to the large state or to the territorial-feudal state." However that may be, that Jung was critical of modern political arrangements generally, and of large modern regimes particularly, is not really in doubt. Jung's poltical thoughts are congruent with, and flow from, his understanding of human nature generally, as of course they must needs do.regards,Dan Watkins>> > AHH Man ! What is happening on this forum ? Comparing Jung to a drunk?> Who in this world is perfect ? What is this Jung bashing going on.> > I think we are forgetting that it was Jung that revealed or at least brought> to light to the modern man the alchemical motives in the paintings and> images. So then weather one is an abstract lover or one studying the > archetypal motives and enjoying the beauty of expressions found therein,> just proves that we are all different and we should judge ourselves and > not others. > > Concerning his fascination with the NAZI movement was the least of all political.> He was more interested with the phenomena of the Mass Hysteria unleashed as> a fire within the collective unconscious of the German psyche unfolding before his > very eyes. He understood that what had to happen will, which is something we> tend to forget. As far as being a woman wrangler, well, women loved him and adored > him. Its far too easy to judge others. Yes there is the collective unconscious which we> can all be ruled by if we let it, but who's part of the community must one be part of? > > Steve Kalec>------------------------------------"Our highest duty as human beings is to search out a means whereby beings may be freed from all kinds of unsatisfactory experience and suffering."H.H. Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th. Dalai Lama

[Guest guest]

Dear Steve,

Mother of Mithra. I'm all for helping out the wife when she needs it, but what's

wrong with a bottle? I have read that in Scandinavia, which always seems to be a

step or two further down the primrose path than we, some women have started to

insist that men refrain from urinating while standing up.

Well, the decline of the west proceeds apace. Nobody asked, but I will say that

it seems to me it can go one of two ways - 1. a technologically imposed and

enforced, universal 1984-type tyranny, probably to include genetic engineering,

which really might be the end (in the sense of kaput, not telos)of humanity, or

2., a genuine cataclysm (brought about in part by global warming? nuclear

weapons?) that will be painful and destructive, but which might hold out the

hope of a do-over of sorts. It seems to me that the latter is our last, best

hope. Certainly there will be no dawning of the age of Aquarius. Jung stated

that, " You know, man doesn't ever stand for his own nullification. " I pray to

whatever gods may be that he is right.

regards,

Dan

> >

> >

> > AHH Man ! What is happening on this forum ? Comparing Jung to a drunk?

> > Who in this world is perfect ? What is this Jung bashing going on.

> >

> > I think we are forgetting that it was Jung that revealed or at least

brought

> > to light to the modern man the alchemical motives in the paintings and

> > images. So then weather one is an abstract lover or one studying the

> > archetypal motives and enjoying the beauty of expressions found therein,

> > just proves that we are all different and we should judge ourselves and

> > not others.

> >

> > Concerning his fascination with the NAZI movement was the least of all

political.

> > He was more interested with the phenomena of the Mass Hysteria unleashed

as

> > a fire within the collective unconscious of the German psyche unfolding

before his

> > very eyes. He understood that what had to happen will, which is something

we

> > tend to forget. As far as being a woman wrangler, well, women loved him

and adored

> > him. Its far too easy to judge others. Yes there is the collective

unconscious which we

> > can all be ruled by if we let it, but who's part of the community must one

be part of?

> >

> > Steve Kalec

> >

>

>

>

>

> ------------------------------------

>

> " Our highest duty as human beings is to search out a means whereby beings

may be freed from all kinds of unsatisfactory experience and suffering. "

>

> H.H. Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th. Dalai Lama

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Blissings,Sam

Search for Soul http://sampatron.wordpress.comJust because I believe something doesn't mean it's true.Just because I don't believe something doesn't mean it's not true. ~ SamDon't believe everything you think. ~ KidaIn all affairs it's a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted. ~Bertrand We cannot live the afternoon of life according to the program of life's morning; for what in the morning was true will in evening become a lie. -- C.G. Jung

We aim to please.