Jung did not prove that religion resides in the psyche. All he proved was that there is a collective unconscious tendency toward certain experiences that are seemingly spiritual. Everything beyond that is just his speculating. An alternative viewpoint is that religions killed off people who don’t have this inclination toward a ā€œhigher power.ā€ The dark side of religion and its violent history is one that many people ignore.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

He just proved a collective unconscious? That’s it?!!!!

Sure.

A tendency.. Seemingly. Prove isn’t even the best word here. His theories are not well accepted.

For example, he talked about a patient he had that dreamt about a beetle. When his patient was telling him the dream, a beetle started tapping on his window. He used experiences like this to claim that we are all connected in some way. And maybe that’s true but this isn’t indisputable proof. Jung practiced as a therapist for over 50 years. Do you understand how many patients he had to have seen in that time span? Most likely thousands. It’s not a stretch to say that this beetle story was just a coincidence. It’s certainly a stretch to claim that this coincidence is somehow special when the rest of his work with his patients were very ordinary. In order to prove something, you have to show a consistent cause and effect relationship. Do insects tap on your window whenever you dream about them? No they don’t.

A simpler example of these ā€œmeaningful coincidencesā€ is when you dream about someone and find out that person also dreamt about you. It’s happened to me several times where I’ll text this person and say I dreamt about you. They’ve responded saying they also dreamt about me. Wow crazy must be proof of something right? Maybe not. How many times have you dreamt of someone who didn’t also dream about you or reach out to you? All the damn time. You just don’t notice. It’s a bias and it’s difficult for people to acknowledge that. Everyone thinks they’re special and immune to these biases but no one actually is. Not even Jung.

This take was awful, dig deeper.

Translation:

I don’t like your analysis so I’m just gonna tell you that you’re wrong šŸ˜‚

Cope harder bro

I literally read it and it drained the life out of me due to the sheer scale of ignorance. Come back when you stop reading Google analyses and ChatGPT on topics way above your current epistemology.

Translation:

I can’t argue my point so I’m going to make fun of you because religion is truth and I was brainwashed to believe it my whole life.

Cool bro

Translation:

I can’t prove my point so I’m going to act superior

Genuinely & truthfully, I honestly couldn’t give a flying fuck what you think or what you’re talking about, you win the argument mahdood, feel free to reply again if you want the last word.

Actually I was agnostic from about 20 years old until I was nearly 34.

Prior to 20, yes, I was immersed in one religious tradition but I stepped away from it in college.

From 34-38 I was still agnostic but I leaned deist. Now I am a perennialist.

And what did you believe before 20?

That’s a complicated question.

A simpler question would be ā€œWhat religious tradition were you raised with?ā€

Roman Catholic

Figured. It is brainwashing. It’s likely that you’re getting older. Seeing people around you die and being faced with your own mortality is a scary experience. Now you’re helplessly looking for answers and coming up with the most convoluted and illogical ones possible. Good luck to you.

Completely wrong take. Have fun with all your assumptions.

Sounds like something a brainwashed person would say šŸ˜‚

You don't understand the Hieros Gamos.

You don't understand how that is the same thing as the Mysterium Coniunctionis, Yin and Yang, Damballa and Ayida Weddo, Fu Xi and Nu Gua, Osiris and Isis, Prince Charming and Cinderella, God the Father and the Holy Spirit, Shive and Shakti, Kether and Malkuth/Shekinah, Chi and Rho, Alpha and Omega, Aleph and Teth, Alif and Ba, Ka and Ba.

You are wrong. Persist in your ignorance if you must.