When did Jung go insane?
>>24885194Bout a week ago
>>24885194filtered! Jung stayed locked in and brought out the hidden centers of the mind. You don't know how groundbreaking his thought was because now it's just accepted canon and common sense.
When he started researching about Kabbalah
>hylic thread
>>24885207>missing the point Jung was making and making it about le technological progressThis is why academia was always a joke.
>>24885207Myths are from of an illiterate popular side of the culture, or at the most from the priests having said illiterates as target audience, you can definitely have scholars, engineers and astronomers while the rest of the people believes in bullshit, just like today.
>>24885194He was insane from the beginning
>>24885194freud tried to father him and he resisted
>>24885194>When did Jung go insane?Very wrong, read spinoza
>>24885222You’re making Jungs error in reverse. He romanticised myth as primitive, you insult them as primitive. Take the Chimaera. Four thousand years ago she wasn’t some bizarre hallucination and nobody regarded her as an uprush from the collective unconscious. She was a formal composite symbol, and was originally a calendar symbol: each of her parts represented one of the three seasons of the Carian sacred year. She’s a piece of cultural mathematics.
>>24885213Pointing out the technological sophistication of Minoan Crete isn’t ‘missing the point’ - it directly challenges Jung’s premise that these myths arise from a ‘primitive mentality.’
>>24885194He was never insane. Freud on the other hand...
>>24885194He didn't. He just went full human.
>>24885206Well kabbalah is an intentionally broken magic system claiming a tree of life when it's actually a tree of death
>>24885194Get an interest on human culture not made in the last 50 yearsPeople claim you went crazy
>>24885278Jung doesn't use 'primitive' pejoratively, nor does he use it in the sense to mean technologically backward or inferior. He just means ancient, early or pre-modern.So despite the "hygienic plumbing" of Minoan Crete, the way ancient greeks experience myth is far removed from the way we do today. This is more evident if you study early modern alchemy
>>24886309He’s wrong to consider it a product of the ‘preconscious psyche’ then, isn’t he?& actually myths can be defined as the equivalent of pictorial shorthand used for religious or political ends. Which isn’t a necessarily primitive technique. You might notice the two major governing parties in America are donkey or elephant.
>>24886342>He’s wrong to consider it a product of the ‘preconscious psyche’ then, isn’t he?Jung isn't saying those advanced Minoans(or Mesopotamians, however far back you want to go) were preconscious, but that by proximity to their preconcsious ancestors, their internal worlds were more steeped in myth than ours.More specifically, many of them had little to no distinction between the symbolic and the "real" world. Symbols were not things to be interpreted, but to be lived and experienced.>actually myths can be defined as the equivalent of pictorial shorthand used for religious or political ends.If you immerse yourself in pre-modern myth and symbolism as much as Jung did, you'd quickly find out just how much of mythology does not serve any worldly(political) benefit at all.
>>24885194probably when he gave himself psychosis so he could talk to his unconscious it's pretty fun though i'd recommend it
>>24886384We can probably assume the writer of the initial excerpt I posted, an author of a compendium of Greek mythology, can be said to know more about myth than CJ. And he wrote an article about how Jung never committed himself to this crude interpretation of mythology, but merely hoped to make his arguments respectable by hanging them on a convenient Classical peg.
>>24885271Then why was this symbol even necessary, and where did it come from?Why would anyone feel compelled to willingly create a visual representation of the seasons? And who would have a use for it?
>>24886428Well, i think he should have widened his studies more or at least have read Jung more thoroughly to know his actual perspective.Many classicists and traditionalists take issue with psychology's "flattening" of mythology into being merely about the self. While this is true for much of psychology, Jung isn't like that. Jung thinks alchemical symbolism could be viewed through the lens of individuation, but the symbolism itself is larger than just that, ie. alchemy is not just psychology disguised in flowery language by people of lesser minds.Though Jung's focus on that particular aspect of myth, with him being a psychologist and all, would make him appear to be just another modern interpreter.I think Jung had two positions. the exoteric one is that much of myth contains the projections of the psyche's individuation process. the more esoteric one is that individuation itself is a part of a larger ineffable "process" that myth and dreams seek to communicate through symbol
>>24886464but of course, anyone could interpret anything from Jung's more "psychotic" works
>>24886446Humans have always externalised knowledge into symbols. Vachel Lindsay wrote a poem about a US election that anyone studying mythology should read and consider it being discovered centuries later:In a coat like a deacon In a black Stetson batHe scourged the Elephant plutocrats With barbed wire from the Platte …… plutocrats...With dollar signs upon their coats And spats on their feet.This is a simple myth for even an Englishman to decipher.
>>24886464Myths are neither irresponsible nor fanciful: they may be defined as the equivalent, in story form, of a pictorial shorthand. A true science of mythology would begin with the deciphering of symbols used in this shorthand at different periods of history or pre-history.
>>24885198Tree fiddy
>>24886446>And who would have a use for it?Literally anyone that touches grass. You sound too isolated from nature.
>>24886502All technological advances have been motivated by humanity's desire to get as far away from nature as possible because nature is dirty, uncomfortable, and constantly trying to kill us through a variety of unpleasant means. Fuck nature.
>>24886428Nobody considered Graves an authority on mythological (aside from himself).
>>24886563Yeah the real authority on mythology must have been Jung right? lmao
