Synchronicity

Chambre de glace dans le pays by De Giffted Artist

Synchronicity

Synchronicity is a scientific sounding term coined by the Swiss psychiatrist C. G. Jung to represent the idea of meaningful coincidence. Whether or not synchronicity is a truly scientific concept remains open to debate.

Implicit to Jung’s idea of synchronicity is the belief that all of creation is somehow connected.

Synchronicity takes three main forms:

1. The coincidence of a psychological state with a corresponding, simultaneously occurring external event with no evidence of causality.
2. The coincidence of a psychological state with a corresponding, simultaneous external event that occurs at a distance, beyond the observer’s normal range of perception.
3. The coincidence of a psychological state with a corresponding event that will occur in the future and which may be verified after its occurrence.

Whether or not synchronicity is a causal or acausal phenomenon is also a point of debate. Jung says it’s acausal but also suggests that the archetypes of the collective unconscious can lead toward synchronicities, implying some kind of causality.

This uncertainty might result from different understandings about the nature of consciousness—particularly, what constitutes the locus of consciousness.

Concerning ethics, synchronicity is ambiguous. Because the concept of synchronicity bears some similarity to the notion of the religious sign, it’s not surprising that different attempts have been made to link this aspect of Jungian thought to theology.

seaorange by shannon kringen

The following represents an attempt to synthesize Christian belief with the concept of synchronicity:

The natural universe, in the Jungian sense of the term natural, contains physical and spiritual dimensions. A person who acknowledges only the reality of the physical realm is incapable of recognizing how synchronicity operates in the New Testament and in our world and cannot see the power of the spiritual. By contrast, a person who goes to the other extreme, who sees reality only in the spiritual realm and denies reality in the physical world, will not spend much time bettering the world and will fall readily into superstition (Morton T. Kelsey, Christo-psychology, New York: Crossroad, 1982, p. 131).

And Fausto Intilla adds, from the perspective of natural pantheism:

If we accept the idea that our Universe really is God, well, in a infinite Caos of Energy too, there must to be a logical (but not for human brain), exact, specific, and perfectly organized …Plan.

How many significant (important) coincidences can happen to a person in his life, living in a unorganizated and stupid Universe?…I think no-one. Every synchronism in our life, is like an open-eyes-dream (Jung taught)…and we can thank the fine intelligence of our Universe…if they happen. » See in context

Some philosophers dismiss the entire notion of synchronicity with the idea of “confirmation bias.” Confirmation bias is described in Wikipedia as

a tendency to search for or interpret new information in a way that confirms one’s preconceptions and avoids information and interpretations which contradict prior beliefs. » Source.

However, we can turn the idea of confirmation bias right back to those who adhere to it as if it were some kind of untouchable universal principle. While the idea of confirmation bias is certainly worthy of consideration, Jung stressed that one doesn’t look for synchronicity but simply witnesses it.

Moreover, some theologians consider the possibility that a biased mind, which we all most likely have, could be temporarily informed by influences superceding one’s psychological makeup, expectations and so on. Indeed, to reduce all synchronistic experience to a humanly constructed idea of “confirmation bias” seems limiting and even unscientific.

This is especially so since parapsychological phenomena tagged as synchronicity often involve the inner experience of numinosity and the outer observing person, and not just psychologically selected or filtered data gained by the senses.

On the Web:

• Article at Earthpages.org » Synchronicity: New Age Fantasy or Face of the Future?
• Synchronicity and Poststructuralism (Ph.D. Thesis by Michael W. Clark – pdf)
• Synchronicity entry at Wikipedia
• “Synchronicity” video at Youtube by the popular 1970s and 80s British rock band, The Police:

» Akashic Records, Causality, Collective Unconscious, Divination, Gawain (Shakti), Hume (David), I Ching, Joachim of Fiore, Jung (Carl Gustav), Klein (Melanie), Koestler (Arthur), Leibniz (Gottfried Wilhelm), Miracles, Morphogenetic Fields, Ram Dass, Talbot (Michael), Unconscious

Add more, fix errors, suggest edits or voice your opinion by commenting

Collective Unconscious

collective unconscious (Photo credit: noneck via Flickr)

The idea of the collective unconscious refers to Carl Jung‘s belief that humanity shares an underlying, biologically inherited storehouse of collective experience and knowledge.

From his considerable study of world myth and religion, Jung came to the conclusion that this collective data is cross-cultural. In fact, he didn’t just see the collective unconscious in myth and religion. He saw universally recognizable motifs among dreams, myth, religion, the arts and architecture. One leading example he provides is the mandala. For Jung,  the circular shape of the mandala represents the potentially limitless self.

Jung calls these hypothesized patterns of human existence archetypes.¹ Existing in a larger time frame than most people’s daily awareness, the archetypes of the collective unconscious apparently connect the past, present and future.

Jung speaks to the arbitrary nature of the term collective unconscious. Towards the end of his career he writes that he rendered essentially spiritual ideas in scientific-sounding language for the sake of professional and societal legitimacy. So this, in a sense, makes him something of a postmodern thinker way before the term became popular.

Because he was, in part, doing a sell job, his insistence on the bio-genetic base of the collective unconscious seems confusing to some, especially when he says:

The unconscious has no time. There is no trouble about time in the unconscious. Part of our psyche is not in time and not in space. They are only an illusion, time and space, and so in a certain part of our psyche, time does not exist at all.²

Could a timeless psyche be entirely biological? Perhaps Jung was saying that, although grounded in the body, the archetypes exhibit or resonate with a spiritual component. That is, a bio-genetic ground is necessary for the interplay of body and spirit.

What About Sigmund Freud and the Unconscious?

Freud and Jung’s views about the unconscious differ, but not so much as many believe. Some pop psychologists and New Age gurus quickly dismiss Freud’s ideas, unaware that his model of the unconscious also contains collective elements.

As we’ve seen in the above, Jung describes the archetype as a component of mankind’s psychological substratum—the collective unconscious. Freud similarly spoke of phylogenetic “schemata” and “prototypes.” And borrowing from ancient Greek and Jewish literature, Freud also devised the “Oedipus complex,” a “primal father” and likened the shadowy contents of the unconscious to archaeological ruins.

In addition, late in his career Freud revised his libido theory to include the general ideas of eros (life instinct) and thanatos (death instinct). Because Freud maintained that the fundamental aspects of the unconscious are universal, aspects of his model of the self, like Jung’s, point to a collective unconscious.³ And not only that. Freud, himself, said that Jung introduced nothing new with the idea of the collective unconscious.  He wrote that the “content of the unconscious is collective anyhow.”⁴

—

¹ Jung’s notion of the archetypes borrows from ideas previously found in anthropology, sociology, philosophy, religion and theology. The term archetype is traceable to St. Augustine, 354-430 CE.

² C. G. Jung Collected Works vol. 18, para. 684, cited in  “Time and Space” at http://www.fundacion-jung.com.ar/ingles/citas.htm.

³ Michael V. Adams illustrates this point in The Cambridge Companion to Jung, (ed.) Polly Young-Eisendrath and Terence Dawson, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, p. 101.

⁴ Sigmund Freud, Moses and Monotheism, p. 209, cited in R. J. Lifton with Eric Olson (eds.), Explorations in Psychohistory: The Wellfleet Papers, New York: Simon and Shuster, 1974 p. 90.

Related Posts » Archetypal images, Sheldrake (Rupert), Synchronicity

Related articles

• Living in a world of symbolism (themysteryofchrist.wordpress.com)
• The quest for individuation: a Jungian looks at Matthew Arnold’s “The Buried Life” (brimmings.com)
• Jung today: An interview with Dr. John Ryan Haule (humanisticpaganism.com)
• Asheville Jung Center Works to Advance the Psychology of Carl Jung (virtual-strategy.com)
• Psychoanalytical Theory – Sigmund Freud (lcdcexamreview.wordpress.com)
• DVD Review – Archetype of the UFO (epages.wordpress.com)
• The Self – God’s window between pantheistic Taoism and Catholic personal god (stottilien.wordpress.com)
• Carl Jung quotes to ponder: (stephencmonahan.wordpress.com)
• The Creative Psyche: Carl Jung and the Unconscious Mind (songsandwordsandthoughts.wordpress.com)

Causality

Spurious Causality by y3rdua via Flickr

Causality is the belief that a second event is the consequence of a first event. This is usually described as a relationship between a cause (first event) and an effect (second event).¹ Not everyone sees causality as a belief. But from a mature philosophical perspective, that’s exactly what it is.

The ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle saw causality in terms of four interrelated causes or explanatory factors:

• The material cause: The raw material used to make an object (e.g. wood)
• The formal cause: What the object will be (e.g. a chair)
• The efficient cause: How the object is created (builder)
• The final cause: The object’s function or purpose (it is used for sitting)

This teleological perspective is based on Aristotle’s belief that a valid distinction can be made between a thing’s essence and its observable form.²

Perhaps in keeping with Aristotle’s idea of a “formal cause,” Michelangelo said that, when sculpting, he simply removed the stone that hid the figure already existing within.

The idea of one event causing another event has been critically examined. The philosopher David Hume suggested that the idea of causality is nothing more than an expectation based on past experience and human limitations.

David Hume (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Hume’s critique of the belief in cause and effect challenges our conventional way of seeing. All we can be sure of, says Hume, is that certain events occur one after another in a given region and for a certain duration.

In billiards, for instance, the white ball appears to cause the motion of other balls when impacting them on the gaming table. But here’s the radical part. Hume says that all we can truly know is that, in the past, the first ball impacted and the other balls moved. We cannot prove that the first ball’s impact will always be followed by movement of the other balls. And for Hume, there is no rational way to demonstrate a causal connection:

Reason can never shew us the connexion of one object with another, tho’ aided by experience, and the observation of their constant conjunction in all past instances. When the mind, therefore, passes from the idea or impression of one object to the idea or belief of another, it is not determin’d by reason, but by certain principles, which associate together the ideas of these objects, and unite them in the imagination.³

Put differently, from prior experience we build up a series of expectations and habitual ways of interpreting observations. Hume calls these “ideas.” But ideas they simply are. Although we expect the billiard balls to move, we have no way of proving or knowing that they always will.

At first, this may seem absurd. But Hume’s critique of causality had a profound effect on one of the most important thinkers in the history of Western philosophy, Immanuel Kant. Mortimer Adler says “…Kant tells us that David Hume awakened him from his dogmatic slumbers.”⁴

Particle tracks in a cloud chamber by Ethan Hein via Flickr

In addition, developments in subatomic physics, especially concerning particle reaction chambers, have challenged many longstanding assumptions about causality. On a quantum level of reality, contemporary physicists claim that observations of subatomic particles support the ideas of probability and simultaneity instead of linear causality.⁵

This radical uncertainty is reflected in the arts and in the depth psychiatry of C. G. Jung, whose concept of synchronicity suggests the possibility of non-causality or acausality.

—

¹ Wikipedia gives a standard definition that most would accept: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality

² A distinction that the Catholic Church adheres to when explaining the efficacy of the Eucharist.

³ David Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature (1896 ed.), SECTION VI.: Of the inference from the impression to the idea, paragraph 278.

⁴ Adler, Mortimer J. (1996). Ten Philosophical Mistakes. Simon & Schuster. p. 94, cited at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critique_of_Pure_Reason#cite_note-2

⁵ Some argue, however, that it’s invalid to compare quantum and macroscopic levels of reality because subatomic particles exist in an entirely different arena, and behave in different ways than the larger aggregate objects which they make up.

On the Web:

• “Aristotle on Causality“
• “Causation: Eastern and Western Views“

Related articles

• The Problem of Induction (plato.stanford.edu)
• David Hume and the Theatre of the Mind (exploringphilosophy.wordpress.com)
• Quantum causal relations: A causes B causes A (eurekalert.org)
• Causation Warps Our Perception of Time (psychologicalscience.org)
• David Hume’s final moments (person) (everything2.com)

Divination

Divination board, Yoruba peoples, possibly Owo region, Nigeria, Late 19th to early 20th century, Wood (Photo credit: cliff1066™)

Divination (from Latin divinare “to foresee, to be supernaturally inspired”) is trying to tell the future, locating lost objects or revealing hidden personality traits through magical or spiritual means, usually with the aid of a special technique. Divination appears in most societies throughout human history. The practice is so widespread that it’s found among the very first literature cultures. S. G. F. Brandon suggests that divination takes two main forms, which he calls automatic and interrogation of divine intent.¹

Some religions frown on the practice, or have come to frown on it by claiming to progressively “perfect,” “complete” or “fulfill” its imperfect religious roots (Christianity being a prime example). But for the most part, divination has been condoned or encouraged by zealous leaders and layperson alike, eager to know what life has in store for them, and how they should best decide on certain issues.

Delphi was home to the famous Dephic oracle. In Tibet, state temples were devoted to divination. In ancient China the I Ching was developed. In Africa oracles and female mediums were consulted. In the ancient Near East animal entrails were examined, their form and condition apparently foretelling future events.

The ancient Romans were mostly concerned with determining the gods’ attitudes towards certain acts. Auspicia were favorable omens (usually the flight of birds) that only senior Roman magistrates could interpret. Prodigia, on the other hand, were evil omens interpreted by the Roman elite, the effects of which could be avoided by civic piety and priestly skill. Augurs involved observing animals, in general, to receive a sign that would help in deciding action in public and private affairs. The Romans, however, were not bound to accept a given augur. They could reject it if they wished, and act on their own accord.²

Freeschool : Divination 101 (Photo credit: queercatkitten)

Divination is found in the Old Testament in several places. It’s generally condemned unless directly relating to God, as in Joseph’s interpreting dreams while held captive in Egypt (Genesis 40:1-23).

In the New Testament we have the indisputable example of the Three Wise Men following the star that lead them to bear gifts to Jesus Christ. Despite this, the Protestant Reformer John Calvin wrote the “Warning Against So-Called Judicial Astrology” in 1549. And Pope Sixtus V officially condemned all forms of divination in 1586.³

Several centuries prior, St. Francis of Assisi apparently opened the Bible at random every morning and read a verse, believing that God directed him to the passage that would set the right tone for his actions through the day.

In a similar vein, the Swiss psychiatrist C. G. Jung believed a spiritus rector lead him to open books at the right page, turn on the radio at the precisely right moment, and so on, in order for meaningful coincidences (synchronicities) to take place.

Related Posts » Apollo, Astrology, Chance, Confucianism, Synchronicity, Tarot, Voodoo

—

¹ S. G. F. Brandon (ed.) Dictionary of Comparative Religion, 1971, pp. 115, 243.

² Ibid. The entry on divination gives many more examples, as does Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divination

³Duby and Perrot (eds.) A History of Women, Vol 3,  2000, p. 455.

Related articles

• Tarot of the Day (the-5th-realm.com)
• Divination Miscellaney. (satsekhem.wordpress.com)
• The Kavad solves a divination question (andrewbwatt.wordpress.com)

Ego

Image credit - UggBoy♥UggGirl via Flickr

In Sigmund Freud‘s psychoanalysis, the ego is the conscious, structured and reasoned aspect of the id. The ego is not present at birth but emerges from the id, acting as mediator between the often conflicted demands of the id and the superego.

In Carl Jung‘s analytical psychology, the ego is a highly continuous “complex of ideas which constitutes the centre of [one's] field of consciousness.” As the psyche’s “point of reference,” the ego’s partly biological component is offset by cultural influences. Its function is to balance the forces of the collective unconscious, the personal unconscious, external society as well as ethically good and destructive influences from both internal and external stimuli.

Jung borrows from Aristotle‘s idea of ‘effects from a First Cause’ by saying that the ego stands in relation to the self as “moved to the mover.” The ego is said to arise from and, in some cases, is at risk of being overtaken by the collective unconscious (as in inflation). Jung claims that many people mistakenly regard their egos as the total self. To compensate for this limited perspective, the collective unconscious tends to assert itself. Because of the almost limitless power of the collective unconscious, this can be a tricky time for the ego, which must represent the forces of the unconscious through language, symbols or art to maintain its autonomy.

In comparing industrialized mankind to so-called primitives, Jung sees the Western ego as a high achievement of humanity (recall that Jung is writing during the modern period). He says that the egos of modern individuals are better differentiated and less luminous than those of their, as he sometimes implies, cruder ancestors. Although no longer wholly identified with the numinous, modern egos are surrounded by a “multitude of little luminosities”–-that is, the unconscious affords different ‘lights’ to ego consciousness without overtaking it entirely. And different individuals exhibit different lights from the unconscious.

Although offering an important alternative to the psychoanalytic wisdom of the day, Jung tends to make sweeping generalizations about the ‘normal’ Western ego, revealing that he too, at least in part, is a product of his times. And his archetypal theory tends to downplay the idea of wholly spiritual influences from above, or at least, constrain these influences into his somewhat limiting theory.

Related Posts » Archetypes, “Ego, Archetype and Self: C. G. Jung and Modernity“

Related articles

• Brief History of Carl Jung (socyberty.com)
• SPIRIT SCIENCE Synchronicity, Part 1: What do we mean by Meaningful Coincidence? (talkingmonkeynews.wordpress.com)
• What is the Archetype in Jungian Psychology (meggella.com)
• Carl Gustav Jung – The World Within (dphilosophy.wordpress.com)
• Anima and animus (solmazhafezi.wordpress.com)
• Synchronicity, Part 1: What do we mean by Meaningful Coincidence? (livewithwonder.com)
• Carl Jung had what would today be called an extended psychotic episode (beyondmeds.com)
• Black Dog (untitledpainting.wordpress.com)
• Anna Freud (earthpages.wordpress.com)

Shakti Gawain

Abstract - by Matthew Burpee via Flickr

Shakti Gawain is a contemporary American spiritualist and author who lives in California. Her books have sold over 10 million copies.¹ The most popular of her publications are Creative Visualization and Living in the Light, although she has penned several others. ²

Gawain writes about how she spent time working as a cleaning lady before she became a popular spiritual teacher. She believes that positive attitude and expectation create a positive reality. She also advocates an eclectic approach to living in relation to the Divine, an approach which includes prayer, chant, meditation, and the “creative visualization” of desired outcomes.

Just how effective creative visualization really is remains a matter of debate. Many visualizers’ visualizations seem to fall flat—that is, they just don’t happen. Some common explanations for the failure of a visualization to come about are “the time wasn’t right” or “I didn’t focus well enough” and so on.³

But for Gawain, it seems that her visualizations for prosperity did come about.

Sympathetic to Carl Jung’s idea of synchronicity, Gawain rejects the Eastern belief in reincarnation on the grounds that it’s a limiting man-made theory. Along the lines of the (some would say pioneering) channeler Jane Roberts, Gawain stresses the importance of living in the present while recognizing past influences.

Most recently, her website stresses the importance of balancing work and play, along with responsibilities to self and others.

I am finding a balance in my life of work and play, of my responsibilities to others and to myself.⁴

Related Posts » Active Imagination, Channeling, Shakti

¹ http://www.shaktigawain.com/about

² See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakti_Gawain

³ Another explanation could be that the personal desire wasn’t in line with God’s will. But we don’t hear that one too much from creative visualizers because they usually (and almost dogmatically) claim that we create our own reality.

⁴ http://www.shaktigawain.com

Related articles

• Simple Daily Ways to Keep Yourself Open and Curious (reinventplay.com)

David Hume

David Hume's statements on ethics foreshadowed those of 20th century emotivists via Wikipedia

David Hume (1711-76) was a Scottish philosopher who developed a naturalist perspective on all aspects of human life.

For Hume, the highest good is based on the pursuit of happiness. We are personally happy when we’re good to others, not due to some high spiritual reward but because this approach leads to a harmonious social whole. So personal and social well-being go hand in hand.

This means that morality isn’t based on austere rational principles but on the desire for enjoyment. Accordingly, Hume believes that reason cannot determine anything without experience. And he goes as far to say that reason is the “slave of passion.”

Hume’s metaphysics, in particular his critique of the belief in cause and effect, remains an important challenge to our conventional way of seeing. All we can be sure of, says Hume, is that certain events occur one after another in a given region and for a certain duration.

In billiards, for instance, the white ball appears to cause the motion of other balls when impacting them on the gaming table. But here’s the radical part. Hume says that all we can truly know is that, in the past, the first ball impacted and the other balls moved. We cannot prove that the first ball’s impact will always be followed by movement of the other balls. And for Hume, there is no rational way to demonstrate a causal connection:

Reason can never shew us the connexion of one object with another, tho’ aided by experience, and the observation of their constant conjunction in all past instances. When the mind, therefore, passes from the idea or impression of one object to the idea or belief of another, it is not determin’d by reason, but by certain principles, which associate together the ideas of these objects, and unite them in the imagination.¹

Put differently, from prior experience we build up a series of expectations and habitual ways of interpreting observations. Hume calls these “ideas.” But ideas they simply are. Although we expect the billiard balls to move, we have no way of proving or knowing that they always will.

At first, this may seem absurd. But Hume’s critique of causality had a profound effect on one of the most important thinkers in the history of Western philosophy, Immanuel Kant.  Mortimer Adler says “…Kant tells us that David Hume awakened him from his dogmatic slumbers.”²

In addition, on a quantum level of reality, contemporary physicists claim that observations of subatomic particles support the ideas of probability and simultaneity instead of linear causality.

However, some say it’s invalid to compare quantum and macroscopic levels of reality because subatomic particles exist in an entirely different arena, and behave in different ways than the larger aggregate objects which they make up.

This debate continues to this day, the answer to which might depend on one’s core beliefs and related worldview. Or in Hume’s terms, one’s “customs of thought.”

Related Posts » Atheism, Behaviorism, Mill (John Stuart), Roberts (Jane), Rousseau (Jean Jacques), Smith (Adam), Synchronicity, Unconscious, William of Ockham

—

¹ David Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature (1896 ed.), SECTION VI.: Of the inference from the impression to the idea, paragraph 278.

² Adler, Mortimer J. (1996). Ten Philosophical Mistakes. Simon & Schuster. p. 94, cited at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critique_of_Pure_Reason#cite_note-2

Related articles

• Link blog: philosophy, hume, atheism, david-hume (pw201.livejournal.com)
• Causality becomes increasingly elusive (boingboing.net)
• Of the Delicacy of Taste and Passion by David Hume (belladeluna.wordpress.com)
• David Hume on Causation (socyberty.com)
• Hume on Rousseau (cafehayek.com)
• “Cause Is Not a Fact”: (brothersjuddblog.com)
• Of Hume and Bondage (opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com)
• On David Hume (myintelligentlife.wordpress.com)

Individuation Process

Original Statue of Carl Jung in Mathew Street, Liverpool, UK (1988). Made of plaster, it was vandalised and replaced in 1993 - Rodhullandemu via Wikipedia

Individuation process is a phrase coined by C. G. Jung to denote a life-long process of self realization. For Jung, the goal is not necessarily the riddance of evil and Christian perfection, which he sees as a somewhat skewed approach, but rather, ‘wholeness.’ Jungians – that is, followers of Jung – strive to know themselves and to become fully responsible for their actions.

Individuation entails an increasing awareness of various personas and primordial/inherited impulses that can obscure but are also a part of the self. The individuation process is said to move through various stages, symbolized and possibly aided by esoteric systems such as kabbala, alchemy and the Tarot.

Jung says that individuation gives us a new perspective on the cultural relativity of social norms. Although one may become more introspective and even ‘removed’ at some point in the journey, this hopefully does not end up in mere neurotic withdrawal (and this is a point where much debate could arise).

Instead, individuation gathers instinctual and social forces into a greater, more expansive sense of self. In contrast to individualism, individuation ‘sees through’ social norms but, at the same time, doesn’t entirely reject them. In fact, Jung often seems to say that a successful life is one that adapts to society—at least, in some way (another point where much debate could arise).

To compensate for the guilt that comes from being different or from partially leaving social norms and expectations behind, the individuating individual feels that she or he must create something of value to atone for his or her departure. Jung, in a rather authoritarian manner, says society has the “right” and “duty” to judge the individual harshly if she or he does not produce such a compensatory work.

Jung’s view here seems to limit compensatory works to material objects that can be perceived through the five senses—that is, the ‘great compensation’ must be something that everyone can understand. In his Collected Works Jung jokes about Tibetan Lamas sending him positive thoughts from some remote hill station. But Jung doesn’t pursue the idea much further.

Not surprisingly, Jung rarely displays genuine appreciation for the idea of spiritual intercession and the transfer of sin. But he’s not totally out in left field here. His work on alchemy and the psychological dynamic of transference provides a glimmer of hope. Jung concedes that personalities may mysteriously intermingle. But that’s about it.

For deeply prayerful and contemplative people,  Jung may be seen as not totally “wrong” but definitely at a kind of kindergarten level with regard to the subtle dynamics of the spiritual life. The American guru Ram Dass implied as much in his work, and it’s likely that other contemplatives in diverse faith traditions would see it this way too.¹

However, Jung was often feisty and quick to respond to a challenge. Were he alive today, he’d probably retort that contemplatives are absorbed in, or identify with, a particular archetypal reality without being able to appreciate other perspectives. And in some instances, this too seems valid.

—

¹ In a recent article about David Cronenberg’s film A Dangerous Method, Jim Slotek describes the Jungian idea of synchronicity as “Jungian spookiness.” But for contemplatives around the world and throughout history, meaningful coincidences are often seen as evidence of our essential interconnectedness and, in the largest sense, God’s plan. And for Catholics and other Christians, they could be evidence pointing toward the “mystical body of Christ.” As Colin Wilson once put it, they’re healthy, not scary.

Related Posts » Faeries, Karma Transfer

Related articles

• Jung, Carl Gustav (earthpages.wordpress.com)
• Carl Jung on reason’s limits. (lifeondoverbeach.wordpress.com)
• The World of Opposites (thejungian.com)
• Active Imagination in the Creative Process (immanence.net)
• Transpersonal (thejungian.com)
• Carl Jung, part 8: Religion and the search for meaning (guardian.co.uk)
• The Conscious and the Unconscious (thejungian.com)
• Mortensen calls for release of more Jung letters (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Mortensen calls for release of more Jung letters (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Carl Jung’s advice (cynthiawh.wordpress.com)

I Ching

Critical Mass I Ching by Payton Chung via Flickr

The I Ching (English: The Great Book of Changes) is an ancient Chinese book of divination which, in its most recent form, is based on ideas from Taoism and Confucianism.

Implied throughout the I Ching‘s worldview is the notion that one’s individual condition is intricately linked to the dynamic workings of nature (to include the cosmos and the Will of Heaven).

The earliest surviving version of the I Ching evolved out of Chinese nature philosophy and was written on bamboo strips. As legend has it, this first incarnation of the I Ching dates back to the mythical Emperor Fu-hsi, c. 2850 BCE. It was composed of eight trigrams (three lines each), which themselves might have been of foreign origin.

Around 1150 BCE, King Wen, who became the Duke of Chou, composed 64 hexagrams of six lines each (two trigrams) with short commentaries. Each hexagram apparently represented an archetypal situation. And each line of the hexagram is based on a binary system (either a solid or broken line) and is attained by selecting a single yarrow stalk from a randomly arranged heap and going through a specific set of operations.

The I Ching influenced Lao Tzu’s composition of another great Chinese work, the Tao-te-Ching, around 500 BCE. During the fifth-century BCE Confucius turned his attention to the I Ching and contributed to the “Ten Wings.” Each Wing is a commentary on an aspect of each hexagram.

Since then, the tyrant emperor Ch’in Shih Huang Ti ordered the burning of the I Ching and all Confucian commentaries, but some copies survived.

Around the third-century the scholar Wang Pi refashioned the book, emphasizing its wisdom instead of divinatory purposes (in contrast to the opportunistic court magicians of the day).

In the 17^th century a Jesuit priest introduced the book to the philosopher Leibniz. Leibniz substituted the solid and broken lines of the hexagrams with “0″ and “1″ and found them to be arranged in a binary system that counted up from 0 to 63.

It’s noteworthy that computer programming uses binary code—the same ancient logic found in the structure of the I Ching.

In the 1960′s the I Ching became popular in the West, and tossing three Chinese coins six times became a viable (and marketable) alternative to the ancient method of selecting yarrow stalks.

Just before this, the psychiatrist Carl Jung wrote a forward to the sinologist Richard Wilhelm’s translation of the I Ching. Jung also mentions the I Ching in relation to his concept of synchronicity.

The Canadian poet and musician Leonard Cohen and other notables have, at some time in their lives, became fascinated with the I Ching’s attractive combination of depth and simplicity. Numerous interpretations and self-help books based on the ancient texts are available today and recent attempts have been made to connect the underlying philosophy of the I Ching with the notion of karma as found in Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism.

As for the ever skeptical John Lennon, he had this to say in the song “God” on the album, Plastic Ono Band:

I don’t believe in I Ching… I just believe in me.

Related Posts » Yin-Yang

Related articles

• Today’s I Ching Hexagram for August 1st is 20: Overview (witchesofthecraft.wordpress.com)
• Works in Progress – Searching for the Bio-Molecular [Proteomic or Genomic or Neuro-Transmitter] Iso-Morphisms in the Tai Hsuan Ching Divination system ! (mosaic613laws613enforcement613laws613akhim.wordpress.com)
• day’s I Ching Hexagram for May 15 is 38: Diverging Interests (witchesofthecraft.wordpress.com)
• Today’s I Ching Hexagram for May 7th is 30:Clinging Like Fire (witchesofthecraft.wordpress.com)
• Today’s I Ching Hexagram for May 16th is 58:Joy (witchesofthecraft.wordpress.com)
• Today’s I Ching Hexagram for May 9th is 13: Fellowship (witchesofthecraft.wordpress.com)
• Today’s I Ching Hexagram for July 18th is 38: Diverging Interests (witchesofthecraft.wordpress.com)
• Today’s I Ching Hexagram for June 1 is 45: Coming Together (witchesofthecraft.wordpress.com)
• Today’s I Ching Hexagram for May 19th is 26: Containment of Potential (witchesofthecraft.wordpress.com)
• Huang’s The Complete I Ching now in Yi Jing for iPad and iPhone (themactrack.com)

Jung, Carl Gustav

Carl Gustav Jung via Wikipedia

Carl Gustav Jung (1875-1961) was a Swiss psychiatrist and man of letters whose cultural impact is second only, perhaps, to that of Sigmund Freud.

While Freud is cited in most scholarly textbooks and dictionaries about society and culture, Jung is only mentioned in some. That’s probably because Freud, with all his limitations, was the first to systematically conceptualize the so-called unconscious aspects of the psyche—at least, Freud was the first to do so on a grand scale.

Jung, on the other hand, was at one time Freud’s favored disciple. As such, his model of the unconscious, as useful as many may find it, builds on Freud’s work.

Another reason Freud might still be more popular than Jung is that Freud speaks to a level of awareness that most members of 21stC culture — or at least, visible culture — can appreciate. Freud still hits, as it were, because his theory reflects the status quo.

However, from the perspective of those who envision the spirit as something different from culture and nature, it appears that not a few people confuse the idea of grace with mere biochemical or sensory impulses. For example, if a long distance runner has only experienced endorphin rushes, or if a canoeist has only delighted at the aesthetics of nature, these people might not understand that grace is something entirely different from biochemically or naturally induced pleasures. So Freud makes sense to these people because, arguably, they haven’t experienced anything else that would demand a better and more complete explanation than Freud’s theory can afford.

From the spiritual person’s vantage point, on the other hand, Freud may have some valuable insights but he’s also terribly reductionist. Along these lines, Jungians will usually say that, as a visionary of sorts, Jung’s full impact is yet to be seen. Mankind just has to catch up with Jung’s forward looking insights. But until that time, Jung will always be number two to Freud. (The jury’s still out on this, of course).

In his early days, Jung distinguished himself with his work in developing a word-association technique, finalized in 1906, which apparently identified unconscious complexes.

In 1907, Jung visited Freud and quickly became part of Freud’s inner circle in the newly arising school of psychoanalysis. As Freud’s protégé, Jung began to formulate his own theories, especially in relation to the libido.

Fearing his professional differences with Freud would rupture their mentor-mentee relationship, Jung withheld his ideas until 1914, at which time he publicly split with Freud. After that, the two never spoke again.

From 1913-1919, Jung underwent what he envisioned as a creative illness. He minimized his activities and generally withdrew from society. During this period he explored the collective unconscious in a somewhat pioneering and (apparently) controlled flight into the psychological underworld.

Jung apparently maintained his mental balance with the help of family ties, dream representation, inventive play and by developing the psychotherapeutic technique of active imagination. After recovering from his creative illness and returning to daily life, Jung began to make significant and lasting contributions to psychiatry and, more generally, to the history of human thought.

In the 1930′s, some controversy arose mainly because Jung headed the International Psychiatric Association, an organization that was funded by the Nazis in Germany. In his memoirs, Jung recounts that he was compelled to make a difficult ethical choice, deciding it best, in the long run, to work at advancing the field of psychiatry within the existing totalitarian political conditions in which he found himself. Scholars and writers still debate the ethics of his choice, their secondhand opinions being formed in hindsight.

Regardless of one’s take on Jung’s level of involvement with the Nazi’s, his work on synchronicity and numinosity are nothing short of groundbreaking. And his innovative work on personality types directly influenced the Myers-Briggs model (and its many offshoots) which are still used today. Moreover, Jung later openly criticized Nazi Germany, likening its sinister powers to the activation of the Teutonic Wotan archetype.

According to Jungian legend, at the time of Jung’s death, his favorite tree at Kusnacht was struck by lightning. And around this time, Jung’s old friend Laurens van der Post dreamed that Jung appeared to him saying, “I’ll be seeing you.”

Related articles

• Carl Jung: The Baby-Boomers’ Friend (themoderatevoice.com)
• Carl Jung, part 2: A troubled relationship with Freud – and the Nazis | Mark Vernon (guardian.co.uk)
• Carl Jung on reason’s limits. (lifeondoverbeach.wordpress.com)
• Brain game (bbc.co.uk)
• Carl Jung, part 1: Taking inner life seriously | Mark Vernon (guardian.co.uk)
• Carl Jung, part 7: The power of acceptance | Mark Vernon (guardian.co.uk)
• Keira Knightley Has Spanking Good Time in ‘A Dangerous Method’ Trailer (moviefone.com)
• Forever Jung (andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com)
• Sony Pictures Classics Pick’s Up Cronenberg’s ‘A Dangerous Method’ (moviefone.com)
• Marxists: What exactly is wrong with Carl Jung? (ask.metafilter.com)
• Carl Jung, part 8: Religion and the search for meaning (guardian.co.uk)