(Part 2) Best products from r/Jung

I just wanted to add something that I felt would be fitting here. This is simply my perspective on the collective unconscious so take it as you will, but it seems relevant.

I see the collective unconscious as being a good basis for spiritual ideas, and I have my own beliefs based around it. The reason I see it as a good basis is 1.) much of it is empirically supported, and 2.) the idea of a collective unconscious itself to some extent implies a universal realm of existence.

First I would like to briefly cover relevant literature which substantiates the collective unconscious. The point of this is to show which aspects of this idea are supported enough to branch off of. The information I’m going to sum up is from the field of research called Affective Neuroscience, which was coined by Jakk Panksepp, who I believe is Jungian himself based on his reference to archetypes, and both Freud and Jung. I believe his book is a must read for all Jung enthusiasts and I’ll be linking it below. After this I’ll present my little theory of what this means from a spiritual perspective.

Summation of Relevant Literature

Affective Neuroscience is a field of study which combines three major disciplines of psychology: Cognitive, Behaviorial, and Neuroscience. What the study’s and experiments have generally shown is that there are distinct anatomical neural structures which illicit consistent patterns of behavior in animals when stimulated, and are shared to varying degrees by all species (the degree of variation becomes larger as species become farther apart on the phylogenetic tree, with the nervous system becoming more complex rostrally as it progresses through species). On top of this, due to the nature of the behavior patterns showing approach/avoidance tendencies, it’s reasonable to conclude that it is an emotional response which is evoked from stimulation that influences the corresponding pattern of behavior.

To simplify, this shows that organisms are preprogrammed with mechanisms to properly respond to environmental triggers. These systems were refined and passed down through millennia’s of adaptations. In a sense, these systems are an ancestral record or bank of knowledge, passed down through generations of offspring to better equip them for the obstacles presented by the physical world. These systems inspire organisms to hunt, forage, seek security, reproduce, as well as many other things.

To show an example of how it works in practice, one of these systems is responsible for dealing with danger; the fight or flight system (more broadly speaking, FEAR). This systems goal is to help organisms detect threats in the environment and react accordingly. Now imagine an archetypal situation: you are hiking through the woods when all of sudden you hear a suspicious crackle in the leaves not to far from you. Upon looking you notice your being stalked by a mountain lion. You freeze up and your heart beats faster as your body prepares to run or fight. What happened here? First, your perception was triggered by an environmental trigger, the mountain lion. Without you putting any effort, your body naturally prepares you to deal with this threat by altering your physiology to better facilitate active movement. On top of this, your phenomenologically struck by an overwhelming sense of fear, your body’s way of not letting you ignore the immediate threat your faced with; painting your perception with a relevant and meaningful narrative: the hunted.

The Parallels

I will now attempt to draw the connections between this information and Jung’s notion of the collective unconscious to show what aspects of it are empirically supported. First, you must understand the concept that brain and mind are intimately connected. Monism or dualism are not important here, just understand that when something occurs in the brain there is a reaction in the mind, and vice versa. Now for the connections:

1.) The neural systems detailed above are shared by all species to varying degrees. What this implies is that there is a template of mind, which is indeed true. All minds share these unconscious operating systems which interpret environmental events in a meaningful way, and evoke a proper response out of the organism. With these systems being homologous throughout species, we could reasonably conclude that these systems make up the neural/physical representation of the collective unconscious.

2.) These systems imbue our perception with meaning. The idea of meaning is almost indistinguishable from archetypes, with Jung describing how these unconscious contents are essentially the source of all meaning. And just as archetypes are all around us, the products of these neural systems are too. It seems these systems project archetypal narratives onto the world around us to allow us to move through the world in a meaningful way. This is seen in the mountain lion example, with the fight or flight system projecting the archetype of the beast onto the mountain lion. This could also be seen in the systems responsible for love projecting the archetype of the anima/animus onto the object of desire.

Spiritual Speculation (Creation Story)

Based on these parallels, the idea that the collective unconscious is universally shared and the source of all meaning is not at all unreasonable, and is empirically supported to a large degree. So we now have a base to branch off of: there exists and aspect of consciousness that is universal and home to all which is meaningful. On the other hand, we have physical reality which exists independent of this realm of consciousness.

From this we can form a sort of story. There exists two worlds: an objective reality, cold and void; and a subjective realm, deep and rich with meaning. Objective reality is finite and exists in certainty, while the subjective realm is amorphous and infinite, being simultaneously beautiful and horrid. Between this chasm of worlds exists a bridge: organisms. The organism is a part of the objective world existing as a sort of vessel for the subjective realm to inhabit. As the subjective realm inhabits this vessel it takes on all its finities by conforming to the structure of its biological limitations (for example, sensory organs). In doing so, the subjective realm takes on the form of an individual, in a sense becoming a soul. The soul walks its path through the objective world, experiencing it from the shoes of its vessel, in the process turning the once cold dead world into a place of meaning and potential, leaving behind it stories of good and bad. But in the end all vessels face the inevitable faith of reality: death. And all souls return to there source, the heavens and hells of the collective unconscious.

Link to Jakk Panksepps Affective Neuroscience:

https://www.amazon.com/Affective-Neuroscience-Foundations-Emotions-Science/dp/019517805X

I would suggest that "renaissance" of their ideas is taking place now.

There's a book called Neurobiology of the Gods that explores this question in relation to neuroscience. It's pretty good, what I've read of it so far.

The author makes a note that some evolutionary psychologists and biologists are coming around to a notion that the mind is structured along lines that Jung espouses in his theory of the Collective Unconscious, and that the concept of archetypes indeed has biological and psychological roots if not structural dynamics informing the phenomena of the human psyche:

>This and other evidence has led neuroscientists to conclude: Most scholars are beginning to concede the existence of a core human psyche that is largely a product of biological evolution (specifically a result of natural selection). . .
Evolutionary psychiatrists are beginning to agree that much of human mental activity is driven by the ancient affective emotional and motivational brain systems shared with other animals. (Panksepp, 2006: 790, emphasis added; see also Gardner and Wilson, 2004; Jones and Blackshaw, 2000). What Panksepp is calling the "core human psyche'' is perhaps comparable to Jung's "collective unconscious''.

>From another perspective, that of cognitive neuroscientists, we find the opinion that "human emotions are underpinned by specific but universal psychobiological mechanisms'' (Stein, 2006: 766). Furthermore, "This fundamental point is at the heart of the evolutionary perspective, and concurs with a vast amount of neuropsychological research'' (Gazzaniga et al., 2002: 596).
sample Chapter

The same author reiterates the claim, on the basis of referenced empirical evidence, that something like 95% of what is going on in terms of consciousness is unconscious in its processes, and what is occurring in those processes also aligns to varying degrees with aspects of Jung's theories.

The following two texts, which I haven't read yet, would also appear to be asserting evidence that links Jung's theories with contemporary scientific understanding in such a way that validates Jung's theoretical model, albeit they have mixed reviews;

Jung in The 21st Century, Volume One: Evolution and Archetype

Jung in The 21st Century, Volume Two: Synchronicity And Science

(in the review section of Volume One's listing, the author of the aforementioned work, The Neurobiology of The Gods, Erik D. Goodwyn turns up and posts this clear, contextual overview of Jung's work and where it is being envisaged as sitting now in emerging scientific discourse, which might go some way to addressing the questioning of Jung's validity from both your girlfriend and professor. Here's an extended excerpt from the review:

>Coming out among the recent renaissance of Jung, including the publication of Jung's "Red Book" in 2010, which has been featured on the cover of Time magazine as well as the Archives of General Psychiatry, Haule takes up the charge first helmed by Anthony Stevens in pointing out the many striking parallels in Jung's thought on the psyche and shows how it is very congruent with the more recent findings of evolutionary biology, neuroscience, primatology and anthropology. Depth psychology in general has suffered in the last few decades due to the perception that it lacks empirical support and it has been supplanted in the public and professional eye by more recent therapies such as Cognitive Behavior Therapy (CBT). This has been due to several trends--the first of which was early arrogance and dominance of Freudian schools within psychology in the first part of the 20th century, and its distrust of empirical research. Along came manualized CBT type therapies in the latter part of the 20th century, which took on a very empirical approach and showed through a large number of accumulated studies that CBT was effective for a variety of disorders. This, along with the lack of enthusiasm for showing empirical effectiveness of psychodynamic styles of therapy such as those based in Freudian psychoanalysis, object relations theory, Self psychology, and of course Jung's "Complex Psychology", witnessed a steady decline in the public eye. Combine this with sensationalized and often rather silly media depictions of psychoanalysis, along with a particular penchant for touting some of Freud's wackier ideas (like "penis envy") that no one takes seriously anymore, and psychodynamic theory suffered greatly.

>Perhaps no one, however, suffered more than Jung, who even in his day was heavily criticized for being a "mystic" in the sense of a befuddled guru and not the positive sense, who challenged Western thought with such outrageous ideas like the mind is not a blank slate, that evolution has had a profound effect on human nature and continues to do so, that altered states of consciousness such as dreaming and trance/reverie produced images that should not be dismissed or explained away with "blahblahblah" types of rationalistic/materialistic reduction but taken seriously as significant expressions of the unconscious psyche. Jungian Analyst Anthony Stevens, along with a few others, however, as early as the 1980s began to notice that though psychology had for the most part forgotten about Jung, there were some curious findings being discovered independently by many other disciplines. He set the playing field with his book "Archetype: Natural History of the Self" (updated in 2002), showing how newer disciplines such as ethology (animal behavior), neuroscience, and evolutionary biology have made a variety of findings that sounded suspiciously like very similar statements about the mind/psyche Jung made decades prior, such as the importance of evolution, our similarity with other animals, the interesting physiology of dreams, and so forth, and has since continued to champion a call to re-examine Jungian thought within the light of all this new research going on largely independently of each other. Jung, it seems, had been right all along, and we are now beginning to see exactly how and why. At the same time, psychodynamic theorists have begun to catch up with CBT-styled therapies and have shown that psychodynamic therapy is not only effective, but in some cases is more effective than CBT; in particular psychodynamic therapy has an 'extended release' effect that continues to improve patient functioning as long as 5 years after therapy has terminated--other non-psychodynamic therapies do not have this effect. Furthermore, detailed comparative studies have shown that even therapies labeled 'CBT' are more likely to be effective when they incorporate one or more principles common to all psychdynamic therapies such as an emphasis on the therapeutic relationship ('transference'), a focus on how early developmental events are playing out in current symptoms, an overall emphasis on encouraging patients to continue to express their feelings, and free exploration of dream and fantasy imagery. Jungian therapy naturally utilizes all of these methods.

>Now enter Haule's work "Jung in the 21st Century". Here Haule pulls together a wide array of studies from fields of primatology, cultural and physical anthropology, evolutionary biology, and weaves a strongly coherent model of the archetype--Jung's most profound and foundational concept--that is firmly anchored in the empirical data of these disciplines. He avoids the mistake of getting hung up on the endless debates in psychology about "mental modules", Haule makes one of the most creative and important contributions to this whole area by showing how archetypes are not independent "algorithms" (which invites all sorts of pointless debates about evolutionary psychology) but "complexities within complexities" that have a long evolutionary history and emerge in development due to our phylogenetic history. These archetypes then shape our common dreams, religious feelings and experiences with "godlike" forces in our life. Haule does not stop there, however, and continues on to organize a model of altered states of consciousness and "shamanistic" practices that have been used by humans for anywhere between 60,000 to 200,000 years to attain better inclusive fitness and achieve their goals both religious and mundane (such as to achieve power and set up social strata). He continues on with a brilliant analysis of the history of consciousness--another of Jung's projects, and broadens the span of Jung's inquiry to include primate consciousness through modern day.

If you're done with the surface level stuff and have all the basics covered, pretty much all of Jung's important work is in the collected works (there's also The Red Book, but that's probably not a good starting point).

There really is no "recommended reading order" for Jung. The CW Wiki page has the release dates for each book, but a few of his books were revised multiple times (there were four editions of Symbols of Transformation, for example), so I don't really know how much of a good barometer that's gonna be. Archetypes of the Collective Unconscious and Psychological Types are popular, not terribly difficult, pretty good starting points for the CW. Aside from a few of more notoriously difficult books like Aion and the works on alchemy (vol 12-14), you can pretty much move on to anything else after that.

Symbols of Transformation is also a key text, it's the book that pretty much laid the groundwork for all of Jung's thought after he separated from Freud. It is not an easy read but if you understand SoT you've got a solid grip on Jung and can probably handle the rest of the CW. And all that aside, it's an extremely rewarding text.

In jungian terms, and, Jung talks at some length about this in his seminars on Nietzsche's Zarathustra, Nietzsche lacked a connection to his "Anima", his inferior function and in turn the unconscious.

(https://www.amazon.com/Jungs-Seminar-Nietzsches-Zarathustra-Jarrett/dp/0691017387/ref=sr_1_sc_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1472918280&sr=8-2-spell&keywords=Carl+Jung+Zarathrustra)

This is the abridged version and is only around 350 pages of what, in its full form, is a whopping 1500 pages. I think its important to keep that in mind while reading.


Anyway, remember we talked about Sensing and Emotion to be Nietzsche's inferior functions. If we look at his life, his chronic illnesses (sensing) and his incredible loneliness(emotion), as many of his friends deserted him later in life, and his love of his life did not accept his love, we can see where his life lacked a strong connection to his philosophy.

Was Nietzsche a Dionysian anywhere else than in his philosophy? At one point, I believe, he had a good strong friend group. But nearer to the end of things, he was incredibly isolated, awkward as hell, and spent a lot of the time watching others in beautiful places. With this in mind, Jung talks about the Apollonian archetype as being an over intellectualized character, not necessarily in the soulless, over rational sense we know nowadays, but in the strongly spiritual/intuitive, bigger than life, on top of the mountains (6000 feet above good and evil) sort of way. Someone who cannot connect with others because hes caught up in intellectual spiritual realms or head spaces. Nietzsche fell into a sort of Enantiodromia, which, is a jungian term to describe being so one-sided that you fall into the opposite side of the spectrum. He lived the apollo life style, that was so part of his age, too the extent that he espoused the anti-thesis, the Dionysus lifestyle.

Nietzsche was a profound thinker and poet, a prototype of the psychologist par excellence. He could see other peoples projections easily, but never his own. With this in mind, lets look at the 'ugliest man'. In other-words, the ugliest man, is the normal man, and was always Nietzsche's shadow, as shown in much of his writing, and especially Thus Spoke Zarathustra. He wanted to be anything but, but paradoxically, it is what he wanted most at times. It is the normal man who experiences the sensing and the emotional aspects of life, which are crucial for a wholesome life. It is the normal man who actually exist in other-words. This is what Nietzsche's unconscious, his Anima, theoretically longed for. To be loved, to be normal, to be amongst other men. Nietzsche story is, fittingly, very tragic. I find that the people that are very steeped in Nietzschean thought tend to identify with too much with a strict Dionysian nihilism. Which is a shame, because I think Nietzsche, though very much birthed the concept, didn't think people would of interpreted like many do. That is, many get to caught up in the intellect and debase every experience, which lifts them up just enough to isolate them from others and just enough to fall down hard into the abyss they made for themselves. Its a vicious cycle! Perhaps getting more down to earth, forgetting his theories and the problems of society, and just feeling and sensing, would be a good way to compensate for this one-sided life style.


All this being said, take this with a grain of salt. I am not a a philosophy major who focused on Nietzsche, but my brother is. So I have had the honor to butt heads with him my entire life on these ideas, which is not to say I haven't read a good deal myself, and don't have a lot of respect for Nietzsche! (and again, sorry for writing so much, I probably over did it)

Wolfgang Pauli and Carl Jung had a very interesting connection. Jung helped Pauli try to understand the Fine Structure Constant of the Universe which is 1/137 by exploring Pauli's psyche in various ways while he researched and worked on the Fine Structure Constant. The dream work they did together is really interesting. They analyzed hundreds of Pauli's dream. Both lived in Zurich at the time. Pauli said that they were exploring the "shadow realm between mysticism and physics."

There is a book out called '137' about Jung and Pauli's friendship and exploration together. Here is a talk give by the Author Dr. Miller on the subject that is quite interesting. (The sound on the video is bad until about 2 minutes in and then it clears up.)

I haven't read the book though just posting the link in case anyone is interested. I first heard about the friendship between the two while becoming interested in the Fine Structure Constant.

Paralysis prevents sleepwalking. It is fairly uncommon for sleepwalkers to actually hurt themselves in a modern home, but the evolutionary roots of dreaming stretch back to the earliest land animals. If you're an outdoor critter, stumbling around at night will make you an easy meal for a predator.

Why We Sleep is a great book on the medical- evolutionary aspects of sleep, it appears to be essential for memory consolidation in complex animals, but even single celled organisms go through a cycle of stasis where they do biochemical repair.

As a Jungian, I consider sleep to be an immersion in the Unconscious, and a time to merge with the transpersonal force of creation. From the outside it looks like memory consolidation, from the inside it looks like travel through an alternate dimension- and both are true in some sense.

These are all excellent suggestions .. and doesn’t it also depend on ‘Who’ is the woman in Op’s Question? I’ve labored for over quarter century reading Jung and everything else I could ever find on the topic of Women, and I’ve concluded it’s an impossible topic to study, that the only “path the enlightenment” on this impossible topic is gaining more experience .. but if Op’s a married man or has a So, maybe the excellent essay “Marriage as a Psychological Relationship” could be helpful? It’s short, but by no means easy, and is available online at this link .. Robert A. Johnson’s “She: Understanding Feminine Psychology” is also an excellent guide.

Love, love, love this movie and that man. He’s a wonderful writer as well. He has another one called My Life as a Turkey.

https://www.amazon.com/Touching-Wild-Living-Deadman-Gulch/dp/1510712321/ref=asc_df_1510712321/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=312064598816&hvpos=1o2&hvnetw=g&hvrand=140058161183688321&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=&hvtargid=pla-523745335427&psc=1

make sure to add Archetypal dimensions of the Psyche...some great stuff there!

Look at the last part of the Translator's preface by Baynes : https://www.amazon.de/Modern-Search-Routledge-Classics-Paperback/dp/041525390X/ref=reader_auth_dp#reader_041525390X

​

Hope that helps.

It seems Jung matured in his understanding over time. It might be interesting to take a look at this book

>Jung, Jungians and Homosexuality by Robert Hopcke. He's a gay jungian psychotherapist in San Francisco.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1579108636/ref=cm_sw_em_r_mt_dp_U_JFtKDb7GFAJHT

https://www.amazon.com/Jung-Jungians-Homosexuality-Robert-Hopcke/dp/1579108636

This is an excellent book on the topic. There’s also a long paper by the same author. I don’t think they book is online, but the paper can be gotten through scihub. PM me if you can’t find it

From The Archetypes and The Collective Unconscious par. 64

"Although she [anima] may be the chaotic urge to life, something strangely meaningful clings to her, a secret knowledge or hidden wisdom, which contrasts most curiously with her irrational elfin nature. Here I would like refer again to the authors already cited. Rider Haggard calls She "Wisdom's Daughter"; Benoit's Queen of Atlantis has an excellent library that even contains a lost book of Plato. Helen of Troy, in her reincarnation, is rescued from a Tyrian brother by the wise Simon Magus and accompanies him on his travels. I purposely refrained from mentioning this thoroughly characteristic aspect of the anima earlier, because the first encounter with her usually leads one to infer anything rather then wisdom. This aspect appears only to the person who gets to grips with her seriously. Only then, when this hard task has been faced does he come to realize more and more that behind all her cruel sporting with human fate there lies something like a hidden purpose which seems to reflect a superior knowledge of life's laws. It is just the most unexpected, the most terrifyingly chaotic things which reveal a deeper meaning. And the more this meaning is recognized, the more the anima loses her impetous and compulsive character. Gradually breakwaters are built against the surging of chaos, and the meaningful divides itself from the meaningless. When sense and nonsense are no longer identical, the force of chaos is weakened by their subtraction; sense is then endued with the force of meaning, and nonsense with the force of meaninglessness. In this way a new cosmos arises. This is not a new discovery in the realm of medical psychology, but the age-old truth that out of the richness of a man's experience there comes a teaching which the father can pass on tho the son."

does anyone know where I can find the complete jung's seminar on zarathustra online?

Which one is this one? https://www.amazon.com/Red-Book-Philemon-C-Jung/dp/0393065677