Everything that irritates us about others can lead us to an understanding of ourselves. - Carl Jung or as my dad paraphrased, "What you like least in others, you like least in yourself." Hatred is something peculiar. You will always find it strongest and most violent where there is the lowest degree of culture. The 'nice' peanut butter is layered thicker the higher the degree of culture. The lower you go the more true honesty you find. What we like least in others we like least in ourselves. - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
While I agree with the analysis that Jung was possibly projecting his own dissatisfaction with a part of his life path, it's not to agree that Jung was completely wrong.
An obsession with philosophy can reflect some kind of inner-tension and turmoil that's being expressed. Obsessions of any kind reflect things about a person which can be seen as negative, but maybe those obsessions, if not for philosophy, would be just as strong towards some other end, which may not be nourishing at all for the mind and spirit.
Maybe claiming someone has "mental health problems" is a symbol for "people who don't live like good lives, like me." It could be an admittance of pride, which can be the face of an underlying envy, which you hit on nicely.
I loved this analysis!, It is so interesting because when you say "To use Jungian terminology his ego always wanted to be a scientist but his soul kept calling him to the humanities". I believe that, in part, and in line with psychoanalytic theory, all people are neurotic to a greater or lesser degree, including Jung. In a way, and without being an expert in anything, I feel that everything created by humans can be influenced by the person's psyche.
I read in an essay about the rift between Freud and Jung that Jung had a dream in which he was forced to kill the hero Siegfried (from Germanic mythology), feeling guilty afterwards and afraid of being discovered, something that psychoanalyst Erich Fromm linked to the unconscious desire to surpass Freud, Siegfried being a dreamlike distortion of Sigmund, something that Jung himself seemed to overlook, but which resonated with me, considering his desire to take his theory to “the top of the world.” As is well known, Jung had many disagreements with Freud and reproached him for giving so much prominence to sexuality in the development of personality and the genesis of neurosis, which caused Freud great disappointment, as he saw him as a successor in psychoanalytic theory and hoped to bring psychoanalysis out of the “Jewish ghetto.”
In his analysis of dementia praecox, Jung expressed his personal opinion by not attributing the same importance to childhood sexual trauma as Freud did. He said that although psychoanalysis was one of many possible methods, that did not mean that it yielded the same results in practice as it promised in theory. Freud interpreted it as Oedipal rivalry, which he interpreted as a symbol of a son's metaphorical hostility towards his father.
All these kinds of things fascinate me, so reading your essay definitely made my day as it gave me a lot to think about!
This was hysterical! I've read most of what was published by Heidegger and the only point when I think he was at odds with himself was when he had to step on his pride and convince Hannah Arendt he made a mistake enlisting in the national socialist party.
Yes they the philosophers are intentionally obscure but partly is due to the fact that they try to describe something that lies deeper than language.
Existentialists try to describe ''first person shooter'' reality game. And it's not pretty. They are indeed better psychologists that Jung or Freud. They probe deeper into their own minds than the ''professionals'' can probe. Wasn't the ''subconscious'' a presupposition of Schopenhauer? Freud capitalized nicely on this idea. Indeed Freud and Jung though insightful now and then they appear impostors compared with the philosophers. They chose a grift and then they envy the originals.
Nice! This article was very funny. Pettiness is always very funny.
Everything that irritates us about others can lead us to an understanding of ourselves. - Carl Jung or as my dad paraphrased, "What you like least in others, you like least in yourself." Hatred is something peculiar. You will always find it strongest and most violent where there is the lowest degree of culture. The 'nice' peanut butter is layered thicker the higher the degree of culture. The lower you go the more true honesty you find. What we like least in others we like least in ourselves. - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
While I agree with the analysis that Jung was possibly projecting his own dissatisfaction with a part of his life path, it's not to agree that Jung was completely wrong.
An obsession with philosophy can reflect some kind of inner-tension and turmoil that's being expressed. Obsessions of any kind reflect things about a person which can be seen as negative, but maybe those obsessions, if not for philosophy, would be just as strong towards some other end, which may not be nourishing at all for the mind and spirit.
Maybe claiming someone has "mental health problems" is a symbol for "people who don't live like good lives, like me." It could be an admittance of pride, which can be the face of an underlying envy, which you hit on nicely.
Great work!
I loved this analysis!, It is so interesting because when you say "To use Jungian terminology his ego always wanted to be a scientist but his soul kept calling him to the humanities". I believe that, in part, and in line with psychoanalytic theory, all people are neurotic to a greater or lesser degree, including Jung. In a way, and without being an expert in anything, I feel that everything created by humans can be influenced by the person's psyche.
I read in an essay about the rift between Freud and Jung that Jung had a dream in which he was forced to kill the hero Siegfried (from Germanic mythology), feeling guilty afterwards and afraid of being discovered, something that psychoanalyst Erich Fromm linked to the unconscious desire to surpass Freud, Siegfried being a dreamlike distortion of Sigmund, something that Jung himself seemed to overlook, but which resonated with me, considering his desire to take his theory to “the top of the world.” As is well known, Jung had many disagreements with Freud and reproached him for giving so much prominence to sexuality in the development of personality and the genesis of neurosis, which caused Freud great disappointment, as he saw him as a successor in psychoanalytic theory and hoped to bring psychoanalysis out of the “Jewish ghetto.”
In his analysis of dementia praecox, Jung expressed his personal opinion by not attributing the same importance to childhood sexual trauma as Freud did. He said that although psychoanalysis was one of many possible methods, that did not mean that it yielded the same results in practice as it promised in theory. Freud interpreted it as Oedipal rivalry, which he interpreted as a symbol of a son's metaphorical hostility towards his father.
All these kinds of things fascinate me, so reading your essay definitely made my day as it gave me a lot to think about!
Wow, really interesting analysis. Almost as if Jung blamed them for his own troubles with neurosis and being at odds with himself.
May be your best essay yet!
Thanks Phil!
Great read! Thank you for posting it.
This was hysterical! I've read most of what was published by Heidegger and the only point when I think he was at odds with himself was when he had to step on his pride and convince Hannah Arendt he made a mistake enlisting in the national socialist party.
Yes they the philosophers are intentionally obscure but partly is due to the fact that they try to describe something that lies deeper than language.
Existentialists try to describe ''first person shooter'' reality game. And it's not pretty. They are indeed better psychologists that Jung or Freud. They probe deeper into their own minds than the ''professionals'' can probe. Wasn't the ''subconscious'' a presupposition of Schopenhauer? Freud capitalized nicely on this idea. Indeed Freud and Jung though insightful now and then they appear impostors compared with the philosophers. They chose a grift and then they envy the originals.
Nice! This article was very funny. Pettiness is always very funny.
This was amusing.Had a good laugh.
psychoanalyzing the psychoanalysers, very edgy
Really liked this.