Carl Jung, James Hillman, and Thomas Moore all taught in varying degrees about the unconscious, archetypes, and depth psychology in general. They have fascinating ideas about the nature of psychosis, all along the thread that symptoms are messengers from the psyche. They mean something.
I’ve read a small amount of Jung
I see a Jungian psychotherapist. Well worth the time.
Did you read him in school or on your own time?
That’s very cool. I read a little in school and then some from my local library years later.
Are you familiar with Jung’s Red Book? I consider this book to be required reading for those interested in Jung (the Red Book is available on Amazon, but it’s not cheap ($171)).
My therapist has this. I can’t afford one being 29 years old. Don’t tell anyone, but I have a pdf version of it I found on google
@kindness Correction: I am 20!
What I found very interesting about the Red Book is Jung’s notes on how he developed an ability to be one with his hallucinations. He claimed to be able to summon them and dismiss them.
Jung took copious notes on this.
I found some of his insights valid but it took sifting through the gross exaggerations and misinterpretations of his claims.
Fascinating ■■■■ but my fingers are not willing to work right now.
Parralell aspects of the psyche so uncanny as if to indicate some sort of purely mental connection between the human being and the rest of the human species.
Really though… The subconscious is conscious and is active in connecting it’s own dots. We have intuitive fears and intuitive pleasures and a host of blurry lines between those.
It’s more a byproduct of the instinctual creature we reside upon and within being paired to our conscious and subconscious experiences.
That’s all my opinion. But jungian archetypes are a neat thing to use as a window into the self… What are we… Why are we here… What lies beyond… And by God why do our minds operate this way?
Yeah, apparently Jung had a “psychic breakdown” (that’s what his critics would call it) and had to remind himself continually that he was Carl Jung, a doctor, husband, and human being.
I think it was partially self-induced. He obviously had a curiosity for those experiences and might have been a bit too thankful to have them occur within him for them to not run away.
I’m curious about Jungian psychotherapy. The traditional, Freudian psychotherapy didn’t work that well for me. I can’t afford any therapy right now, and probably won’t be able to any time in the future, so this is just a passing interest for me.
Freud was a mad scientist IMO.
Jung called himself an empirical psychologist but I would call him a prophet, and healer of the soul.
A good intro to Jung would be June Singer’s “Boundaries of the Soul”. It’s a bit long and a shorter alternative would be Murray Stein’s intro book can’t remember the name
I learned about them and their ideas in psych. It was a fun course, but I only took it in highschool so it wasn’t super in depth.
Yeah if you want depth you gotta go to a Jung Institute, go trough analysis yourself, or spend a good chunk of time reading his writings deeply.
I’ve never taken a psychology course myself. I don’t like the traditional approach teachers take.
I’m fairly familiar with only Jung out of those three you mentioned.
I own the Red Book, Memories Dreams and Reflections and a couple others by him.
I’m not familiar at all with any of those people except Jung and that’s only in the personality tests that came from after his research was halted. He was pretty cool in that he could narrow down types of personality into 16 different types, yet still leave room for the individuality that is in the common person.
I was more in depth in Freud’s work that he developed psychoanalysis and which I use myself when someone is (or I am) in distress. The levels of complexes that work within the human mind is fascinating and some have been stated that when one or more are in conflict with one another that it causes psychosis. Which I don’t believe, it’s probably more of a disassociation from the least favored and reassociation to the more favored complex.
But yeah a lot of unconscious research and experiments are hard to do and plus a lot of cognitive research has been on the rise in the past few decades since the mid 1900s. Wish there would have been more done in the unconscious realm but that’s.the.way.it.goes.
Freud was a crackpot.
Im changing my major to psychology so I’ll definitely be taking a look at some of this psychobabble. I personally think its a bunch of self indulgent nonsense and talk for the sake of talking. But my school’s psych program is better than its anthropology program, and psychology doesn’t involve too much math so im going for it. A lot of people consider that degree useless though, no application for it unless you have a masters or something. But I’m better at reading and writing than I am at math and I think this will be a good way to dodge all that. Ap psych in high school was a breeze for me pre sz, and I got a 4 on the exam. My post sz memory and brain are nowhere near what I had pre sz, before the illness set in I could have done and did math related stuff.
I think, but not sure, that Jung was either a student or a colleague of Freud. To me, Freud and Jung are the two most well known pioneers of psychiatry.
Sometimes a crackpot is just a crackpot.