Rehabilitation sentimental de la fonction dans notre civilization par CG Jung
Marie Louise von Franz
The s'agit de la dernière conférence Donnée par Marie Louise von Franz Küsnacht in 1997. Initially introduced in Germany in 1982 under the title "CG Jung's Rehabilitation der in unserer gefühlsfunktion Zivilisation, this translation is based on the version published in German on the occasion of his 75th birthday (Beiträge zur Jung'schen Psychology, Victor Orenga Editores, Valencia. 1990).
Translation: "Friends of alchemy," cgjung.net
At the age of 21-23 years, during his medical studies Jung gave four lectures front of his classmates of the corporation Zofingia in Basel. In one of them, in 1897, he cites the following passage from Kant's psychology: "The bottom line is always the character and this is the holy and invincible, that we must protect this and is also the foundation and goal of all our speculations and research. All metaphysical speculations arising therefrom. God and the "other world" are the only goals of our research and if philosophical concepts of God and the "other world" does not depend on morality, they would not help. "
Then, after a sharp attack against materialism in general, Jung continues: "We must first line as" revolution from above "imposed on science and its representatives morality by some transcendent truths [...] We must, for example, Physiological Institute in which we weaken the moral voluntarily students through experiments shameful and barbaric torture by cruel to animals, devoid of any humanity in such institutes, "I must be taught that no truth sought by immoral means will be granted a moral justification. "
Then Jung returns to Kant, and stresses the idea of it that only the belief in the truths that lie beyond the crass material world, can ensure a moral human being. What I want to highlight these quotations is that Jung was in itself a kind of introverted thinker, but even in this account of youth, his feelings expressed. It was never an intellectual cold. Eighty-four years have passed since this statement and where are we today compared to this problem?
The cruel torture of animals has multiplied by thousands, not only in laboratories scientists, but also recently in agriculture. It spread as a result of torture of countless people worldwide. Military experts now calculate how coolly, in an atomic war, millions of people could be annihilated. Okay, it's their job, but we do not notice they are upset or depressed when they have to calculate that. However, these facts are known and so I'll turn first to what we are nearest our own domain, in fact, psychology. In universities, statistics is an asset, only the hard data, ie statistics, are taken seriously. Jung, however, has long put her finger on the sore spot: the statistics tell only intellectually abstract image of the scanned object and not its reality. If, for example, we find that in a heap of stones, they weigh about half a kilogram, in fact we find almost no stone exactly what weight. Thus, we construct an abstract model of reality and then we mix it with the current reality, however, a closer view, consists only of exceptions. All the sciences based on mathematics after this way and because Jung did not follow the movement, was accused of being "unscientific" - that is true some times, but Jung was more realistic -. In therapy, it has eliminated the distance with the white coat of the doctor who treats the patient how an object impersonal. Jung met with each patient's personal feelings, it was positive or negative, and he made each analysis session a personal encounter. The disciples of Jung again surreptitiously introducing technical processes such as discussion of the required transfer have simply fallen into a mode of thought pre-Jungian. This particularly concerns the so-called transfer problem, that is precisely the relationship of feeling treated as a given handle.
In a letter, Jung wrote explicitly: "The dissolution of the transfer is often the fact that we constantly define their relationship as a transfer." This word belittles the relationship to a simple projection, it is not. The transfer is in the illusion of uniqueness, when considered in terms of collective and conventional. The uniqueness lies not only between individual beings, they have other reports that individual reports, it is say unique. [1] is why - and we must conclude - the word transfer should be used only where there is a tendency to deliberately devalue illusory projections, but not for the romantic relationship that is established slowly over treatment.
course, a false goodness and kindness that support everything, as some analysts show towards their patients, are equally false, and they succeed the former general's role and serve as camouflage for not expressing his own feelings, feelings that are often not at all a universal love, but used to circumvent the frictions and confrontations. This kindness towards the person is a derivative of Christian sentimentality, which I will later.
Let us return to the first issue of Science. Our modern world of science and technology and lifestyle are largely constructed by scholars whose primary function is introverted or extroverted thinking, coupled with an extra sense or introverted. In physics, for example, introverts like Einstein, Bohr, Pauli, etc ... prefer theoretical physics; extroverts, like Wernher von Braun, experimental physics. The intuitive is not completely excluded because we need to speculative ideas to find new ways of thinking.
But the feeling is nowhere expressed mostly in childish phrases and caring that contain all the little word "should". And with the exception of Niels Bohr, all cited physicists have worked or wanted to collaborate in the manufacture of atomic bombs. Nowadays, physicists in the USA, there is a tendency to Hindu philosophy, which in truth is anti-materialist, but that does not value the life of the individual.
No need to expose how modern medicine has become inhuman. The newspapers are full, but nothing happens. We therefore can not estimate high enough working alone, pioneer, without criticism of Dr. Elisabeth Kubler Ross, who has dared take a step in the right direction.
Another area where our feeling has failed miserably, is the so-called development aid. Dr. Benno Glauser wrote on this subject an excellent article in the journal of the Swiss Red Cross [2] . It exposes how we try to "help" people of other cultures at the same time trying to impose our religion or our scientific views and destroying their own religious and spiritual foundation. Our doctors, missionaries, agricultural planners and advisers are all starting the precondition that we "know" what is good or bad for others. They are then either disappointed or angry when these people refuse to help with our apathy, resistance or so-called ingratitude.
I quote in the article by Pai Glauser is an Indian of Paraguay told a cooperating doctor: "For us, Pai, health is a state we call" tekoresai "so that" state to be in good "is guaranteed certain things and conditions must be given. All are part of the "to be in good condition" and are the constituent elements: plants and trees as individual remedies, but all plants and all the trees together, the words of truth and balanced good nutrition does not act over the heads of others, the rainforest, harmony, community village, talking with others, maintain our "way of life", living our own culture and our way of life, the feeling of strength given to us by all the things I mentioned, the maintenance of our community, live quiet and safe in our country coexistence in the family and the village festivals. Then you, the whites, you arrive and you make us dependent on money and other material things, it destroys our "good health". You hold of bad speech, you talk ill of others. You take our land, not having land means no food, no food means the disease. And finally, you put your hand in your pocket, you pull out a small white pill and you want us to believe that by eating this pill can find health, that this pill is health .... "
All our destructive activity, as highlighted Glauser, based a fundamental lack of respect for each other and different cultural values, in other words a lack of genuine feeling differential. Basically, we know precisely the catastrophic effects of our behavior and the growing hatred of other nations to the white race, but we seem not to be able to fight against it.
However, we do not need to go as far remote tribes in the same indifferent attitude also prevails in our group to another. Our urban and regional planners projètent on the drawing board plans of cities and roads that destroy thereafter happiness of countless people. They think coolly as if a farmer receives proper compensation for expropriated or other replacement land, the thing is settled justly. But this peasant loves his plot may be that, it does not count. Or, we go out of their people aged slum where they feed on cats and birds and we are surprised when they die then whisked their new environment supposedly better and more hygienic as no cat or bird does dirt.
But then, what should we do? Change our policy because our legislation? Because the latter deals with these problems clearly. Erich Neumann wanted to establish new moral codes so militant in his book Depth Psychology and New Ethics ", his book was printed, but in the end, it produced no result. Presumably this is not the way to handle this problem. I think that CG Jung, 22, has put his finger on the main point, namely that we must first recognize the "reality of the soul", ie also of the unconscious and reality God or the Self and reality transmatérielle before tackling any other thing. An example: I recently a conference in Germany on the dreams of dying, which suggests a possible life after death. After the conference, a nurse came to me crying and she said: "What you said can not and must not be true, otherwise I should confess such horrible things ...." She did not say anything, but she obviously has mishandled dying patients can be stolen at'elle, thinking they were more aware, so that his act had no consequences. But, of course, if their souls were still there? It would be another matter. It is no coincidence that Dr. Kübler Ross begins to deal with spiritualism, as I hear say. This is the logical continuation of his work with the dying - probably when - like us, the reality of the unconscious. His sense leads consequently to this approach.
In all religions of all times and there exists a representation of a god or gods and of "a world beyond" is a non-material life and that alone can constitute the foundation of a true ethics . "The deviation of Numen" Jung wrote for that reason "seems to go everywhere and always the worst evil and the most original."
And conversely, the existence of any ethics based on the phenomenon of consciousness, ie on a sentimental relation between "the individual and the transcendental or the archetype of the Self. What
by cons, we live in the crass material world is everywhere unjust suffering and triumph of injustice. For good behavior is going to fool naive when used. The suffering of innocent first Christian martyrs had notable consequences at least on the ground and converted many to Christianity. But who remembers today the name of this young German schoolteacher who went voluntarily with his Jewish schoolchildren in the gas chamber to console? What effect has the plight of dissidents and courageous Christians in Russia? Nothing! We read in the newspapers and we rely with a resigned shrug.
Dr. Liliane Frey has published the dream of a dying patient, whose life was a series of field failures. He dreamed: "... A voice said:" Your work and your sufferings you have endured consciously issued hundred generations before you and will mark a hundred generations after you. "
Again, the existence of a world beyond is crucial. In a material world only, there is no solace to this man.
But why should he have to do specifically with the function sentimental? Is the recognition of psychic reality is not important for the four functions of consciousness? Obviously the values of ethics is "essentially a product of highly differentiated emotional function" as Jung wrote, but it also requires some intelligence, to which I will later. But in any case, ethics can not exist without feelings differentiated, otherwise it becomes a rigid code of conduct, ie a pure collective obligation. Everyone can experience this when such a simple arrangement is applied police schematically, where large scale we can see how the state machinery in Russia?
Now someone might argue: so where are the kinds of feelings that eventually should be present in sufficient numbers in each population? Why do not they make up this state of emergency? We need to make a difference here between the existence of types and fashion collective sense of time and the collective attitude of a culture. Of course, we have many type feeling with a sense differential among us, but fashion, the spirit of conduct and a collective understanding, does not recognize the feeling. This weakens the influence of sentiment even among the types feeling. In addition, the function of a minor type feeling is, as we know, thought. This will often result in currents of less value in our time, the cheap materialism and intellectualism. Thus, we see no example in many Latin cultures prefer communist ideology in its most stupid as people themselves are rather less devoid of feelings and less educated than many non-Latin peoples. I think here in Spain, Italy and many South American states. What is so bad everywhere, is that the zeitgeist today devalues the feeling. We often hear, for example the decision (eg against ANA) they do that "arguments based on feelings instead of rational arguments for their cause" and that with the sub understood that a feeling is a co ipso imbecility. The same is found for disorders of youth. Instances of right-thinking constantly trying to deal with "reasonably" with rebellious youth, totally without success because these kids are filled with feelings opaque and largely negative, they can not be translated using the thought or feeling. Several governments are proposing, it is true, a generous aid program specifically for young unemployed to facilitate their further training. It is surely right and good, but will it be sufficient support? Can a rebellious young unemployed will cease to rebel if he learns a little more electronics? We know that the Soviets pay some of these rebels, but is this enough to add money? I do not think we can achieve many things if we keep ourselves at the materialistic thought reasonable, not that it is false, as a whole, it is only wrong when we say it all . Jung wrote in a letter that "we have become unilaterally intellectualist and rationalist" and that "we have totally forgotten that there are other factors that do not allow themselves not influenced by the straightness of reason and understanding. Hence we see everywhere a blaze of mystical emotionality that had been declared extinct since the Middle Ages. " This is a compensation of technical progress made too quickly.
So we need more than understanding and reason because these irritate even more young people. We should be able to offer an overview of new and creative being and, namely, a vision of mind as all non-materialistic. In my opinion we should be able to establish a relationship with the unconscious as above sensory reality to which we must refer not only with understanding, but also with feeling and emotion. What about the many forms of Eastern mysticism are as fashionable among us? With us, they too easily become something of an intellectual, they are directed primarily at the thought and intuition, or, as a form of yoga to the sensation. These teachings are indeed, as Jung points out, indeed theological systems which do little or nothing if the individual and his individual relationship to the divine. "For too much about East" he writes, "has replaced direct experience and thus, access to psychology is blocked. However, it is conceivable that men first try all avenues before deciding to make the journey into the unknown. "
In a letter to Miguel Serrano continues: "You've chosen two good representatives of the East and West. Krishnamurti is completely irrational and he abandons the solutions to the inertia, ie, he leaves it alone, as belonging to mother nature. Toynbee for his part believes that opinions can be formed and molded. Neither one nor the other believes in the emergence and development of the individual as an experiment and a work of dubious and confusing living god. To him we must lend our eyes and our ears and our critical "(because God wants us to reach our consciousness). "We urgently need a truth or evidence, like that of ancient Egypt, as I found living in Taos Pueblo. The leader of their cult, the old Ochwïah Biano (Lake Highlands) said: "We are the people who live on the roof of the world, we are the son of the sun who is our father. Every day we help to get up ... We are not doing this just for ourselves but for Americans ... If they continue and keep us, then they will see that in 10 years the sun will never rise again. He rightly recognized that their day, their light, their consciousness and their spirit will die if the narrow-minded rationalism destroyed the U.S.. This will happen to the world, even if it is delivered to rationalism. "
Elsewhere, Jung pointed out that if we endorse the teachings of the East, without criticism, opinions are obviously more important for us that life in our own inside, so that hope and ecstasy liberating experience primitive figeront soon in an effort essentially intellectual, so that instead of a primary experience, we will have a built in imitation method. Many eastern methods
oppress even unconscious, instead of establishing a relationship with him. All this is enough to show that in the context of Jung, it can not be any real ethics without a living experience of the divine. It is not related to any theological education. The original experiment can not be experienced by the individual, which I did not experience, is never really real to me, it can exist in my head as an idea or opinion, but this is not experience. It makes a big difference if I know the elephants by my reading and if I know they exist or if I've seen, felt or touched one. That alone is an experience myself when I saw something with all my duties, including the feeling.
But what about Christian charity? Is not ultimately what we seek and what we should return? Certainly Christianity began as largely an experiment. The early Christians were mostly slaves and uneducated people and their brotherly love for each other created a fertile link between them. Many early Christians even boasted of not being intellectual. But soon the doctrinaire theological, doctrinal disputes and the persecution of heretics took over and universal charity was restricted by the principle of power, the hereditary enemy of all forms of love.
The Marxist slogan of international solidarity is in many ways a return to the ideal of love of the early Christians, but no transcendental foundation, referring only to hardware side of it.
In our time, all nations of the earth have converged on the technical, economic and spiritual development and for that we particularly need a general sense of community. It is even one of the assets in Communist propaganda. Since the Soviet system has disappointed on this point many of his supporters, many turn to a Eurocommunism or something similar. In South America, Che Guevara is often literally celebrated as a kind of hero of love, especially by women. Despite all the disappointments, many clergy of all denominations are turning to Marxism, because they feel it is close to the ideal of brotherly love, dear to the early Christians. But where communism took power, he has produced conflicting results. Jung wrote: "The collective systems, called political party or State, produce a destructive effect on human relationships. These can be easily destroyed because people are still in a state of unconsciousness that is by no means done for the enormous growth and fusion of the masses. As we know, in all states totalitarian, the primary concern tends to destroy personal relationships with fear and distrust, so that creates a fragmented mass, in which the human soul is completely suffocated. Even the parent - child relationship, the closest and most natural is torn by the State [...] The only way to stop this is to develop awareness of the individual. Thus, it immunized against the temptations of collective organizations. So just save his soul rest, for his life based on human relationships. Emphasis should be placed on developing human consciousness and not on the organization state. And elsewhere: "The cohesion and coexistence of mankind are one of the most important existential questions. But it is complicated by the fact that the individual must be independently present, which is possible only if the community has only relative value. Otherwise she drowns and destroys the individual and even then it is even more. In other words, a true community can be formed by autonomous individuals who, to some extent, may be collective beings "(True community requires" psychological understanding and approach of different points of view ").
Many young people, most of the left, now experimenting community life, by experiencing a new kind of community relationship. But to finish with what I learned, such communities continue to explode due to internal disputes. The feeling enthusiastic acceptance in love with each other does not when it comes to everyday life because it is too undifferentiated ideally. Crisis explosive burst the community. Crises and emotions are the signs of feeling indifferent. I analyzed a few young men who lived together and it went as among other people, even in regard to their romantic relationships. However, this leads most of the time they leave their communities of origin and they create a circle of personal friends. Today, many are a kind of worship from crises and emotions: positive form of "Happenings" musical or negative spillovers. Protesters often think they express feelings, which is not quite true because the feelings are only in a primitive state, coupled with the emotions by feeling against differential is not at all emotional. Cultivating emotions and crises of conscious is sickly and eventually leads to self-destruction. What does not concord between Christian love of neighbor and its extensions in the temporal and materialistic socialism and communism? Their positive aspect is a certain community of human feelings that connects us to all men, but their downside is puerile sentimentality and emotional, which is nothing other than the reverse of the brutality. While our old ladies knit panties Wool pickaninnies the naked slave traders of the same denominations were destroying the lives of thousands of blacks. This is an example that shows the brutality and sentimentality are two sides of one coin. We can not revert to such childish Christian charity but we must return to her as love of neighbor universal level. What does it look like it? Jung called this a new form of Eros (Love) has a curative effect and which is the radiation of individual personality.
This eros is recognized as a feminine principle. This form of love was symbolized in the alchemical tradition by a strange figure, with blood-colored pink, which exudes from the stone of sages or "homo putissimus" and heal all people. Homo putissimus is the name of the man the purest and most genuine, as opposed to Christ, homo purissimus, which is the purest human being. He is a man who knows everything that is human and that is falsified by any foreign influence or no mixing. He is said to deliver the world from evil in the end times by his blood pink. This symbolizes a certain Eros unites the individual to a single or group of individuals and must compensate for lack of feeling of our time, a form of love which is connected to a superior knowledge of self and tolerance. Former Christian love was too blind and intolerant, you can even explain where the Inquisition. "More love is blind," said Jung, "The more he is impulsive and destructive consequences of threat because it is a dynamic that lacks the shape and direction." For its proper use should be expanded awareness and a higher base because a man is abused by his unconscious projections and therefore can not see and love others, as it is. Too much feeling of unconsciousness produced most of the time a close too large, too close a rapprochement without trial in a enantiodromia which is sprayed by an explosion of emotions. By cons, a relationship includes a differentiated sense of distance, different in each case. Jung wrote in a letter: "The reductions are part of Chapter distance the most important and most difficult process of individuation. The danger is always that distance is reduced unilaterally, it inevitably comes a kind of rape with a consequent resentment. Every relationship has its optimum distance (the optimal distance) to be naturally found empirically. Resistors must be carefully followed. . Jung stresses that this is particularly difficult for men and women because he also mingled sexuality. A romantic relationship would be differentiated both a deep understanding and personal closeness of the other warm. But it would also be a certain distance, an understanding and not understanding, the latter meaning the silent respect of the mystery of another person. For a blind and impulsive lover, this distance makes a big pain, but she assures him or her own freedom, without which individuation is not possible. This seems to be a point of great importance and great significance for the future.
During a discussion on the danger of a third war, this time Atomic, Jung said that the only opposition force could be a religious movement with a global leading to a general conversion. Since Jung wrote that in 1945 we can observe that attempts in this direction are held in different locations: a rebirth of Islam, sects such as Bahai, the Moon in Korea, or the countless missions Buddhist Hindu Gurus . They are trying to provoke such a global movement, the church Catholic is not the last, which always "spirit touches the animal mass, as demonstrated by recent events in Poland. But like all religious systems are unfortunately not just a factor of hello, they also have a dangerous shadow. An archetype, which moves the masses led most of the time that people think that they alone possess the truth so they continue to do those who think otherwise. In addition, religious leaders, as political leaders, tend constantly to what the individual identifies with his truth, the truth is always unilateral. "Even if it were to be a great truth, identification with it would be a disaster because it would stop the further spiritual development. Instead of knowledge, we no longer believe that and it's sometimes more comfortable and more attractive for that. In other words, a universal religious movement could save us from the spiritual desolation of materialism and maybe a third world war, but he still has the drawback of supporting a mass mentality. Only an inner perception facing our own shadow and the shadow of archetypes is to say the religious powers, could protect us from being swept away by the mass psyche and tendency to self-destruction. That means we must develop a romantic relationship differentiated, including the required distance to the inner powers, and that we must establish a relationship between you and me with the Self, the Godhead, or the numinous, not instead develop uncritical religious fanaticism, which is based on a possession by the numinous.
sentimental relationship to others outside and to the archetypal forces inside complement each strange. In his memoirs, Jung said in effect that the standard of life is the relationship to infinity. "Only when I know that infinity is the important thing, I do not my interest to trivia. Ultimately only the essential has value, and if I can not win, life is ruined. Even in relation to another, it is crucial to know if infinity is expressed in him or not. Jung means by that a deeper relationship with others is possible only through the self. From me to me there most of the time that communities of interest superficial. How the Self takes place in a relationship, we can not expose here. Jung tried to explain in his books on the transfer and in Mysterium Conjunctionis. But it remains a mysterious adventure ever love.
It seems to me to conclude now that the attitude of Jung is gradually being understood better than the living. However, this point, most important, ie rehabilitation of eros between men and emotional relationship to the transcendent differentiated, is still insufficiently taken into account. Too many people see the submissions of Jung as a philosophical system or theory, or even worse, as a new ideology or a new collective psychological counseling, they are not at all. The analytic process is a process of pure empirical experience, in which psychology ultimately transcends itself as a pure science. During this process, everything is transformed into a living encounter with internal and external entities with which we need to have a romantic relationship. Jung's emphasis on individual items is aware and voluntarily compensate the unilateral unilateral group that predominates today. "There," he wrote about 1934, "always two points of view and they exist still, in fact the point of view of social guide, which shows the extent it is idealistic, salvation in a more or less total oppression of the individual (for the community) and spiritual guide who tries to obtain an improvement only in the individual. I see no possibility of reconciliation between the two since they form a counter torque necessary to keep the world in balance. " Jung saw his own role in improving the individual, which is not without a romantic relationship personal and unique. Maybe you it will come one day in history, as the knight who sought to reported community Jar Grail disappeared, the feminine principle of Eros, meaning that "homo putissimus" of alchemy that exudes a blood-colored rose, a new form of love and healing overall, which can compensate the couple antagonist group - individual but can also exceed it.
2 Letter to Mrs. Froebe Kapteyn. August 16, 1947 - Français Letters Vol. 1 p 475 (absent from the German edition).
3 No. 5 - 1st July 1981, p 13
At the age of 21-23 years, during his medical studies Jung gave four lectures front of his classmates of the corporation Zofingia in Basel. In one of them, in 1897, he cites the following passage from Kant's psychology: "The bottom line is always the character and this is the holy and invincible, that we must protect this and is also the foundation and goal of all our speculations and research. All metaphysical speculations arising therefrom. God and the "other world" are the only goals of our research and if philosophical concepts of God and the "other world" does not depend on morality, they would not help. "
Then, after a sharp attack against materialism in general, Jung continues: "We must first line as" revolution from above "imposed on science and its representatives morality by some transcendent truths [...] We must, for example, Physiological Institute in which we weaken the moral voluntarily students through experiments shameful and barbaric torture by cruel to animals, devoid of any humanity in such institutes, "I must be taught that no truth sought by immoral means will be granted a moral justification. "
Then Jung returns to Kant, and stresses the idea of it that only the belief in the truths that lie beyond the crass material world, can ensure a moral human being. What I want to highlight these quotations is that Jung was in itself a kind of introverted thinker, but even in this account of youth, his feelings expressed. It was never an intellectual cold. Eighty-four years have passed since this statement and where are we today compared to this problem?
The cruel torture of animals has multiplied by thousands, not only in laboratories scientists, but also recently in agriculture. It spread as a result of torture of countless people worldwide. Military experts now calculate how coolly, in an atomic war, millions of people could be annihilated. Okay, it's their job, but we do not notice they are upset or depressed when they have to calculate that. However, these facts are known and so I'll turn first to what we are nearest our own domain, in fact, psychology. In universities, statistics is an asset, only the hard data, ie statistics, are taken seriously. Jung, however, has long put her finger on the sore spot: the statistics tell only intellectually abstract image of the scanned object and not its reality. If, for example, we find that in a heap of stones, they weigh about half a kilogram, in fact we find almost no stone exactly what weight. Thus, we construct an abstract model of reality and then we mix it with the current reality, however, a closer view, consists only of exceptions. All the sciences based on mathematics after this way and because Jung did not follow the movement, was accused of being "unscientific" - that is true some times, but Jung was more realistic -. In therapy, it has eliminated the distance with the white coat of the doctor who treats the patient how an object impersonal. Jung met with each patient's personal feelings, it was positive or negative, and he made each analysis session a personal encounter. The disciples of Jung again surreptitiously introducing technical processes such as discussion of the required transfer have simply fallen into a mode of thought pre-Jungian. This particularly concerns the so-called transfer problem, that is precisely the relationship of feeling treated as a given handle.
In a letter, Jung wrote explicitly: "The dissolution of the transfer is often the fact that we constantly define their relationship as a transfer." This word belittles the relationship to a simple projection, it is not. The transfer is in the illusion of uniqueness, when considered in terms of collective and conventional. The uniqueness lies not only between individual beings, they have other reports that individual reports, it is say unique. [1] is why - and we must conclude - the word transfer should be used only where there is a tendency to deliberately devalue illusory projections, but not for the romantic relationship that is established slowly over treatment.
course, a false goodness and kindness that support everything, as some analysts show towards their patients, are equally false, and they succeed the former general's role and serve as camouflage for not expressing his own feelings, feelings that are often not at all a universal love, but used to circumvent the frictions and confrontations. This kindness towards the person is a derivative of Christian sentimentality, which I will later.
Let us return to the first issue of Science. Our modern world of science and technology and lifestyle are largely constructed by scholars whose primary function is introverted or extroverted thinking, coupled with an extra sense or introverted. In physics, for example, introverts like Einstein, Bohr, Pauli, etc ... prefer theoretical physics; extroverts, like Wernher von Braun, experimental physics. The intuitive is not completely excluded because we need to speculative ideas to find new ways of thinking.
But the feeling is nowhere expressed mostly in childish phrases and caring that contain all the little word "should". And with the exception of Niels Bohr, all cited physicists have worked or wanted to collaborate in the manufacture of atomic bombs. Nowadays, physicists in the USA, there is a tendency to Hindu philosophy, which in truth is anti-materialist, but that does not value the life of the individual.
No need to expose how modern medicine has become inhuman. The newspapers are full, but nothing happens. We therefore can not estimate high enough working alone, pioneer, without criticism of Dr. Elisabeth Kubler Ross, who has dared take a step in the right direction.
Another area where our feeling has failed miserably, is the so-called development aid. Dr. Benno Glauser wrote on this subject an excellent article in the journal of the Swiss Red Cross [2] . It exposes how we try to "help" people of other cultures at the same time trying to impose our religion or our scientific views and destroying their own religious and spiritual foundation. Our doctors, missionaries, agricultural planners and advisers are all starting the precondition that we "know" what is good or bad for others. They are then either disappointed or angry when these people refuse to help with our apathy, resistance or so-called ingratitude.
I quote in the article by Pai Glauser is an Indian of Paraguay told a cooperating doctor: "For us, Pai, health is a state we call" tekoresai "so that" state to be in good "is guaranteed certain things and conditions must be given. All are part of the "to be in good condition" and are the constituent elements: plants and trees as individual remedies, but all plants and all the trees together, the words of truth and balanced good nutrition does not act over the heads of others, the rainforest, harmony, community village, talking with others, maintain our "way of life", living our own culture and our way of life, the feeling of strength given to us by all the things I mentioned, the maintenance of our community, live quiet and safe in our country coexistence in the family and the village festivals. Then you, the whites, you arrive and you make us dependent on money and other material things, it destroys our "good health". You hold of bad speech, you talk ill of others. You take our land, not having land means no food, no food means the disease. And finally, you put your hand in your pocket, you pull out a small white pill and you want us to believe that by eating this pill can find health, that this pill is health .... "
All our destructive activity, as highlighted Glauser, based a fundamental lack of respect for each other and different cultural values, in other words a lack of genuine feeling differential. Basically, we know precisely the catastrophic effects of our behavior and the growing hatred of other nations to the white race, but we seem not to be able to fight against it.
However, we do not need to go as far remote tribes in the same indifferent attitude also prevails in our group to another. Our urban and regional planners projètent on the drawing board plans of cities and roads that destroy thereafter happiness of countless people. They think coolly as if a farmer receives proper compensation for expropriated or other replacement land, the thing is settled justly. But this peasant loves his plot may be that, it does not count. Or, we go out of their people aged slum where they feed on cats and birds and we are surprised when they die then whisked their new environment supposedly better and more hygienic as no cat or bird does dirt.
But then, what should we do? Change our policy because our legislation? Because the latter deals with these problems clearly. Erich Neumann wanted to establish new moral codes so militant in his book Depth Psychology and New Ethics ", his book was printed, but in the end, it produced no result. Presumably this is not the way to handle this problem. I think that CG Jung, 22, has put his finger on the main point, namely that we must first recognize the "reality of the soul", ie also of the unconscious and reality God or the Self and reality transmatérielle before tackling any other thing. An example: I recently a conference in Germany on the dreams of dying, which suggests a possible life after death. After the conference, a nurse came to me crying and she said: "What you said can not and must not be true, otherwise I should confess such horrible things ...." She did not say anything, but she obviously has mishandled dying patients can be stolen at'elle, thinking they were more aware, so that his act had no consequences. But, of course, if their souls were still there? It would be another matter. It is no coincidence that Dr. Kübler Ross begins to deal with spiritualism, as I hear say. This is the logical continuation of his work with the dying - probably when - like us, the reality of the unconscious. His sense leads consequently to this approach.
In all religions of all times and there exists a representation of a god or gods and of "a world beyond" is a non-material life and that alone can constitute the foundation of a true ethics . "The deviation of Numen" Jung wrote for that reason "seems to go everywhere and always the worst evil and the most original."
And conversely, the existence of any ethics based on the phenomenon of consciousness, ie on a sentimental relation between "the individual and the transcendental or the archetype of the Self. What
by cons, we live in the crass material world is everywhere unjust suffering and triumph of injustice. For good behavior is going to fool naive when used. The suffering of innocent first Christian martyrs had notable consequences at least on the ground and converted many to Christianity. But who remembers today the name of this young German schoolteacher who went voluntarily with his Jewish schoolchildren in the gas chamber to console? What effect has the plight of dissidents and courageous Christians in Russia? Nothing! We read in the newspapers and we rely with a resigned shrug.
Dr. Liliane Frey has published the dream of a dying patient, whose life was a series of field failures. He dreamed: "... A voice said:" Your work and your sufferings you have endured consciously issued hundred generations before you and will mark a hundred generations after you. "
Again, the existence of a world beyond is crucial. In a material world only, there is no solace to this man.
But why should he have to do specifically with the function sentimental? Is the recognition of psychic reality is not important for the four functions of consciousness? Obviously the values of ethics is "essentially a product of highly differentiated emotional function" as Jung wrote, but it also requires some intelligence, to which I will later. But in any case, ethics can not exist without feelings differentiated, otherwise it becomes a rigid code of conduct, ie a pure collective obligation. Everyone can experience this when such a simple arrangement is applied police schematically, where large scale we can see how the state machinery in Russia?
Now someone might argue: so where are the kinds of feelings that eventually should be present in sufficient numbers in each population? Why do not they make up this state of emergency? We need to make a difference here between the existence of types and fashion collective sense of time and the collective attitude of a culture. Of course, we have many type feeling with a sense differential among us, but fashion, the spirit of conduct and a collective understanding, does not recognize the feeling. This weakens the influence of sentiment even among the types feeling. In addition, the function of a minor type feeling is, as we know, thought. This will often result in currents of less value in our time, the cheap materialism and intellectualism. Thus, we see no example in many Latin cultures prefer communist ideology in its most stupid as people themselves are rather less devoid of feelings and less educated than many non-Latin peoples. I think here in Spain, Italy and many South American states. What is so bad everywhere, is that the zeitgeist today devalues the feeling. We often hear, for example the decision (eg against ANA) they do that "arguments based on feelings instead of rational arguments for their cause" and that with the sub understood that a feeling is a co ipso imbecility. The same is found for disorders of youth. Instances of right-thinking constantly trying to deal with "reasonably" with rebellious youth, totally without success because these kids are filled with feelings opaque and largely negative, they can not be translated using the thought or feeling. Several governments are proposing, it is true, a generous aid program specifically for young unemployed to facilitate their further training. It is surely right and good, but will it be sufficient support? Can a rebellious young unemployed will cease to rebel if he learns a little more electronics? We know that the Soviets pay some of these rebels, but is this enough to add money? I do not think we can achieve many things if we keep ourselves at the materialistic thought reasonable, not that it is false, as a whole, it is only wrong when we say it all . Jung wrote in a letter that "we have become unilaterally intellectualist and rationalist" and that "we have totally forgotten that there are other factors that do not allow themselves not influenced by the straightness of reason and understanding. Hence we see everywhere a blaze of mystical emotionality that had been declared extinct since the Middle Ages. " This is a compensation of technical progress made too quickly.
So we need more than understanding and reason because these irritate even more young people. We should be able to offer an overview of new and creative being and, namely, a vision of mind as all non-materialistic. In my opinion we should be able to establish a relationship with the unconscious as above sensory reality to which we must refer not only with understanding, but also with feeling and emotion. What about the many forms of Eastern mysticism are as fashionable among us? With us, they too easily become something of an intellectual, they are directed primarily at the thought and intuition, or, as a form of yoga to the sensation. These teachings are indeed, as Jung points out, indeed theological systems which do little or nothing if the individual and his individual relationship to the divine. "For too much about East" he writes, "has replaced direct experience and thus, access to psychology is blocked. However, it is conceivable that men first try all avenues before deciding to make the journey into the unknown. "
In a letter to Miguel Serrano continues: "You've chosen two good representatives of the East and West. Krishnamurti is completely irrational and he abandons the solutions to the inertia, ie, he leaves it alone, as belonging to mother nature. Toynbee for his part believes that opinions can be formed and molded. Neither one nor the other believes in the emergence and development of the individual as an experiment and a work of dubious and confusing living god. To him we must lend our eyes and our ears and our critical "(because God wants us to reach our consciousness). "We urgently need a truth or evidence, like that of ancient Egypt, as I found living in Taos Pueblo. The leader of their cult, the old Ochwïah Biano (Lake Highlands) said: "We are the people who live on the roof of the world, we are the son of the sun who is our father. Every day we help to get up ... We are not doing this just for ourselves but for Americans ... If they continue and keep us, then they will see that in 10 years the sun will never rise again. He rightly recognized that their day, their light, their consciousness and their spirit will die if the narrow-minded rationalism destroyed the U.S.. This will happen to the world, even if it is delivered to rationalism. "
Elsewhere, Jung pointed out that if we endorse the teachings of the East, without criticism, opinions are obviously more important for us that life in our own inside, so that hope and ecstasy liberating experience primitive figeront soon in an effort essentially intellectual, so that instead of a primary experience, we will have a built in imitation method. Many eastern methods
oppress even unconscious, instead of establishing a relationship with him. All this is enough to show that in the context of Jung, it can not be any real ethics without a living experience of the divine. It is not related to any theological education. The original experiment can not be experienced by the individual, which I did not experience, is never really real to me, it can exist in my head as an idea or opinion, but this is not experience. It makes a big difference if I know the elephants by my reading and if I know they exist or if I've seen, felt or touched one. That alone is an experience myself when I saw something with all my duties, including the feeling.
But what about Christian charity? Is not ultimately what we seek and what we should return? Certainly Christianity began as largely an experiment. The early Christians were mostly slaves and uneducated people and their brotherly love for each other created a fertile link between them. Many early Christians even boasted of not being intellectual. But soon the doctrinaire theological, doctrinal disputes and the persecution of heretics took over and universal charity was restricted by the principle of power, the hereditary enemy of all forms of love.
The Marxist slogan of international solidarity is in many ways a return to the ideal of love of the early Christians, but no transcendental foundation, referring only to hardware side of it.
In our time, all nations of the earth have converged on the technical, economic and spiritual development and for that we particularly need a general sense of community. It is even one of the assets in Communist propaganda. Since the Soviet system has disappointed on this point many of his supporters, many turn to a Eurocommunism or something similar. In South America, Che Guevara is often literally celebrated as a kind of hero of love, especially by women. Despite all the disappointments, many clergy of all denominations are turning to Marxism, because they feel it is close to the ideal of brotherly love, dear to the early Christians. But where communism took power, he has produced conflicting results. Jung wrote: "The collective systems, called political party or State, produce a destructive effect on human relationships. These can be easily destroyed because people are still in a state of unconsciousness that is by no means done for the enormous growth and fusion of the masses. As we know, in all states totalitarian, the primary concern tends to destroy personal relationships with fear and distrust, so that creates a fragmented mass, in which the human soul is completely suffocated. Even the parent - child relationship, the closest and most natural is torn by the State [...] The only way to stop this is to develop awareness of the individual. Thus, it immunized against the temptations of collective organizations. So just save his soul rest, for his life based on human relationships. Emphasis should be placed on developing human consciousness and not on the organization state. And elsewhere: "The cohesion and coexistence of mankind are one of the most important existential questions. But it is complicated by the fact that the individual must be independently present, which is possible only if the community has only relative value. Otherwise she drowns and destroys the individual and even then it is even more. In other words, a true community can be formed by autonomous individuals who, to some extent, may be collective beings "(True community requires" psychological understanding and approach of different points of view ").
Many young people, most of the left, now experimenting community life, by experiencing a new kind of community relationship. But to finish with what I learned, such communities continue to explode due to internal disputes. The feeling enthusiastic acceptance in love with each other does not when it comes to everyday life because it is too undifferentiated ideally. Crisis explosive burst the community. Crises and emotions are the signs of feeling indifferent. I analyzed a few young men who lived together and it went as among other people, even in regard to their romantic relationships. However, this leads most of the time they leave their communities of origin and they create a circle of personal friends. Today, many are a kind of worship from crises and emotions: positive form of "Happenings" musical or negative spillovers. Protesters often think they express feelings, which is not quite true because the feelings are only in a primitive state, coupled with the emotions by feeling against differential is not at all emotional. Cultivating emotions and crises of conscious is sickly and eventually leads to self-destruction. What does not concord between Christian love of neighbor and its extensions in the temporal and materialistic socialism and communism? Their positive aspect is a certain community of human feelings that connects us to all men, but their downside is puerile sentimentality and emotional, which is nothing other than the reverse of the brutality. While our old ladies knit panties Wool pickaninnies the naked slave traders of the same denominations were destroying the lives of thousands of blacks. This is an example that shows the brutality and sentimentality are two sides of one coin. We can not revert to such childish Christian charity but we must return to her as love of neighbor universal level. What does it look like it? Jung called this a new form of Eros (Love) has a curative effect and which is the radiation of individual personality.
This eros is recognized as a feminine principle. This form of love was symbolized in the alchemical tradition by a strange figure, with blood-colored pink, which exudes from the stone of sages or "homo putissimus" and heal all people. Homo putissimus is the name of the man the purest and most genuine, as opposed to Christ, homo purissimus, which is the purest human being. He is a man who knows everything that is human and that is falsified by any foreign influence or no mixing. He is said to deliver the world from evil in the end times by his blood pink. This symbolizes a certain Eros unites the individual to a single or group of individuals and must compensate for lack of feeling of our time, a form of love which is connected to a superior knowledge of self and tolerance. Former Christian love was too blind and intolerant, you can even explain where the Inquisition. "More love is blind," said Jung, "The more he is impulsive and destructive consequences of threat because it is a dynamic that lacks the shape and direction." For its proper use should be expanded awareness and a higher base because a man is abused by his unconscious projections and therefore can not see and love others, as it is. Too much feeling of unconsciousness produced most of the time a close too large, too close a rapprochement without trial in a enantiodromia which is sprayed by an explosion of emotions. By cons, a relationship includes a differentiated sense of distance, different in each case. Jung wrote in a letter: "The reductions are part of Chapter distance the most important and most difficult process of individuation. The danger is always that distance is reduced unilaterally, it inevitably comes a kind of rape with a consequent resentment. Every relationship has its optimum distance (the optimal distance) to be naturally found empirically. Resistors must be carefully followed. . Jung stresses that this is particularly difficult for men and women because he also mingled sexuality. A romantic relationship would be differentiated both a deep understanding and personal closeness of the other warm. But it would also be a certain distance, an understanding and not understanding, the latter meaning the silent respect of the mystery of another person. For a blind and impulsive lover, this distance makes a big pain, but she assures him or her own freedom, without which individuation is not possible. This seems to be a point of great importance and great significance for the future.
During a discussion on the danger of a third war, this time Atomic, Jung said that the only opposition force could be a religious movement with a global leading to a general conversion. Since Jung wrote that in 1945 we can observe that attempts in this direction are held in different locations: a rebirth of Islam, sects such as Bahai, the Moon in Korea, or the countless missions Buddhist Hindu Gurus . They are trying to provoke such a global movement, the church Catholic is not the last, which always "spirit touches the animal mass, as demonstrated by recent events in Poland. But like all religious systems are unfortunately not just a factor of hello, they also have a dangerous shadow. An archetype, which moves the masses led most of the time that people think that they alone possess the truth so they continue to do those who think otherwise. In addition, religious leaders, as political leaders, tend constantly to what the individual identifies with his truth, the truth is always unilateral. "Even if it were to be a great truth, identification with it would be a disaster because it would stop the further spiritual development. Instead of knowledge, we no longer believe that and it's sometimes more comfortable and more attractive for that. In other words, a universal religious movement could save us from the spiritual desolation of materialism and maybe a third world war, but he still has the drawback of supporting a mass mentality. Only an inner perception facing our own shadow and the shadow of archetypes is to say the religious powers, could protect us from being swept away by the mass psyche and tendency to self-destruction. That means we must develop a romantic relationship differentiated, including the required distance to the inner powers, and that we must establish a relationship between you and me with the Self, the Godhead, or the numinous, not instead develop uncritical religious fanaticism, which is based on a possession by the numinous.
sentimental relationship to others outside and to the archetypal forces inside complement each strange. In his memoirs, Jung said in effect that the standard of life is the relationship to infinity. "Only when I know that infinity is the important thing, I do not my interest to trivia. Ultimately only the essential has value, and if I can not win, life is ruined. Even in relation to another, it is crucial to know if infinity is expressed in him or not. Jung means by that a deeper relationship with others is possible only through the self. From me to me there most of the time that communities of interest superficial. How the Self takes place in a relationship, we can not expose here. Jung tried to explain in his books on the transfer and in Mysterium Conjunctionis. But it remains a mysterious adventure ever love.
It seems to me to conclude now that the attitude of Jung is gradually being understood better than the living. However, this point, most important, ie rehabilitation of eros between men and emotional relationship to the transcendent differentiated, is still insufficiently taken into account. Too many people see the submissions of Jung as a philosophical system or theory, or even worse, as a new ideology or a new collective psychological counseling, they are not at all. The analytic process is a process of pure empirical experience, in which psychology ultimately transcends itself as a pure science. During this process, everything is transformed into a living encounter with internal and external entities with which we need to have a romantic relationship. Jung's emphasis on individual items is aware and voluntarily compensate the unilateral unilateral group that predominates today. "There," he wrote about 1934, "always two points of view and they exist still, in fact the point of view of social guide, which shows the extent it is idealistic, salvation in a more or less total oppression of the individual (for the community) and spiritual guide who tries to obtain an improvement only in the individual. I see no possibility of reconciliation between the two since they form a counter torque necessary to keep the world in balance. " Jung saw his own role in improving the individual, which is not without a romantic relationship personal and unique. Maybe you it will come one day in history, as the knight who sought to reported community Jar Grail disappeared, the feminine principle of Eros, meaning that "homo putissimus" of alchemy that exudes a blood-colored rose, a new form of love and healing overall, which can compensate the couple antagonist group - individual but can also exceed it.
2 Letter to Mrs. Froebe Kapteyn. August 16, 1947 - Français Letters Vol. 1 p 475 (absent from the German edition).
3 No. 5 - 1st July 1981, p 13
0 comments:
Post a Comment