As humanity reaches a point of darkness and where as a matter of course the shadow gets projected outwards in a constant blame game we need to turn to two thinkers that are deeply unpopular amongst the elite.
I would go further and say that deep thinking itself is deeply unpopular.
We live in an age of toxic ideology.
The Carl Jung Behind Jordan Peterson
The
Swiss psychologist foresaw and lamented the West's break with
tradition and the loneliness of modernity.
Jordan
Peterson By
Gage Skidmore/Creative Commons and
Carl Jung in 1909 (Sigmund Freud Museum/Public Domain)
11
March, 2019
With
Sigmund Freud, the Swiss psychologist Carl G. Jung (1875-1961)
pioneered studies of the human unconscious. After he famously
rejected Freud’s views on religion and sexuality, he undertook a
lifelong investigation of dreams, symbols, and archetypes to tie
modernity to age-old images and traditions. What the human psyche
craves are faith, hope, love, and insight. Jung thought these were
achieved through experience, not formal instruction.
The
Age of Enlightenment had “stripped nature and human institutions of
gods,” Jung professed, bestowing rationality and wealth but
neglecting core elements of human satisfaction. To dismiss the soul
as illusion was to miss something big. “Instead of being at the
mercy of wild beasts, earthquakes, landslides, and inundations,”
Jung said, “modern man is battered by the elemental forces of his
own psyche,” destabilized by unfulfilled spiritual yearnings.
The
notion that Jung became a solitary man of genius after his break with
the psychoanalytic movement in 1913 is false. He remained highly
connected, a prolific writer with global renown that has never
lapsed. His impact on German novelist Hermann Hesse was profound.
From the time of his Harvard seminars and Yale lectures in 1936 and
1937, he drew a number of highly accomplished American admirers. He
appeared on the cover of Time magazine in 1955. During the early,
intellectualizing counterculture, Jung’s metaphysics harmonized
with the humanistic revolt against technocratic, secularizing
society. Technology dulled instincts, Jung feared.
Jung
sharply rejected Freud’s outlook on religion and sexuality. For
Freud, religion was illusion and superstition, but for Jung it was a
wondrous manifestation of human nature and ineffable soul. “How are
we to explain this zeal, this almost fanatical worship of everything
unsavory?” Jung once asked. Freud “has taken the greatest pains
to throw as glaring a light as possible on the dirt and darkness and
evil of the psychic background.” The outcome of Freud’s
preoccupation with aggression and sexuality, Jung decided, was not
catharsis but “admiration for all this filth.” For Jung, the
unconscious was more than a repository of suppressed will and lust.
The libido was closer to Henri Bergson’s life force, a sunnier view
of human nature and personality than Freud allowed.
“For
a young person, it is almost a sin, or at least a danger, to be too
preoccupied with himself,” Jung insisted. You must detach from
loving parents, go out and do something, make a life. Thus,
inspecting the stages of life, Jung precedes his most prominent
contemporary student, psychologist Jordan Peterson. Elemental
cravings—faith, hope, love, and insight—equally concern Peterson,
whose sensationally popular book, 12 Rules for Life, is exposing a
new generation to Jungian concepts.
The
profuse number of man-children and wounded women in a never-grow-old
culture indicates something terribly socially amiss—on that, Jung
and Peterson agree. Charmless slackers and baristas who seem so often
to have grown up with absent fathers or in odd, blended families are
liberated from tradition and canon but feckless and lonely. Neurotic
efforts, said Jung, to extend youthful conquests and an endless
horizon continue “beyond the bounds of all reason” into middle
age and beyond. Conversely, the old, instead of pursuing
“illumination of the self,” turn into hypochondriacs and
adventurers.
Through
dream analysis and arcane studies, Jung investigated themes and
symbols that constitute “identical psychic structures” common to
all cultures. Comparing age-old myths, fables, and sacred figures
provides a grammar or code to understand the imperatives of human
nature. To cope with the world, said Jung, individuals might present
a polished, conscious persona. Yet the unconscious—the “shadow”
or “dark side”—might make anyone feel stupid, gauche,
vulnerable, or evil. There’s extraversion, talkative and energetic,
and introversion, reserved, solitary, and contemplative. The
mathematician, editorialist, connoisseur, and visionary might be
equally brilliant but each has distinct preferences, strengths, and
behaviors. These different personality types might also have
difficulty understanding, validating, and cooperating with one
another.
Jung
has many adversaries. Postmodernists reject his Bildung view of
civilization, rooted in European learning and scholarship, expressing
its ambitions in complex thought, literature, music, fine arts, and
science. Christians don’t like his syncretism. Jungian insiders can
be clubby, precious, and tedious. In a takedown of Jordan Peterson,
the New Republic’s Jeet Heer called Jung’s collective unconscious
“a speculative netherworld that defies empirical verification.”
Heer speaks for those who think Jung is a mystic or charlatan. Jung
can be cryptic, ecstatic, and strange. Even Jordan Peterson—who is
a bit strange himself—admits that.
Many
years ahead of his time, Jung perceived the ontological void that
accompanied Christianity’s recession. Waning spiritual power
induced the rise of unstable, insecure, and suggestible masses, he
warned, hobbled with debilitating feelings of insignificance,
inadequacy, and hopelessness. When “earth was eternally fixed and
at rest in the center of the universe,” he said, people “were all
children of God” who knew the path to “eternal blessedness” and
“joyous existence.” Such a “life no longer seems real to us,
even in our dreams.”
One
of Jung’s best-known works, Modern Man in Search of a Soul (1932),
collects 11 short essays that outline concepts he elsewhere
elaborates on at length. The collection contains “The Spiritual
Problem of Modern Man,” one of his most celebrated articles, which
first appeared in the December 1928 issue of Europäische Revue.
Here Jung developed his most explicit analysis of “modernity.”
As
for many Europeans of Jung’s generation, what he called the
“catastrophic results” of the First World War “shattered faith
in ourselves and our own worth.” The Bolshevik revolution in Russia
stirred panic among Central Europe’s cultivated bourgeois, and
Weimar antics colored the scene. Before Adolph Hitler or Hiroshima,
Jung said, “I am losing my faith in the possibility of a rational
organization of the world,” and “as for ideals, neither the
Christian Church, nor the brotherhood of man, nor international
social democracy, nor the solidarity of economic interests has stood
up to the acid test of reality.”
Jung
disdained the “pseudo-modern” who exhibits “ineradicable
aversion to traditional opinions and inherited truths.” Modern for
Jung would not be a Google virtual reality coder or a psychedelic
conga line at Burning Man. He insisted that the genuinely new sprang
from profound familiarity with the past, not from know-nothing
condemnation of it. New ideas are always alarming, he understood, and
modern thinkers from Socrates to Galileo to Nietzsche disturbed the
conformative equilibrium even while anchored to history and culture.
To the falsely modern individual, who “wants to experiment with his
mind as the Bolshevik experiments with economics,” Jung said, “all
the spiritual standards and forms of the past have somehow lost their
validity.”
For
decades now, throughout the U.S. and Europe, pseudo-modernity has
hypertrophied. For liberated individuals young and old, the self is a
preoccupation. I’m not here to make friends; I’m here to win.
Wellness and entertainment fill any void. Cosmetic surgery bears no
stigma. Marketers with complex proprietary information and
irresistible electronic tools at their disposal do their best to
reshape the collective unconscious, often with a libertine edge.
Jung
has been accused of anti-Semitism and fascist sympathies, perceived
as a right-wing shadow figure by his enemies, as has Jordan Peterson
more recently. In early psychoanalytical circles, Jung had been a
Protestant among Jews. After his break with Freud, he observed in
private letters what he took to be general Jewish personality traits,
including aggression and hypersensitivity to criticism. He
disapproved of Judaism’s role in the secularization of modern life.
Yet Jung thought Freud and his circle “accused me of anti-Semitism
because I could not abide his soulless materialism.”
The
Nazi sympathies are confected. Jung operated as an analyst and
informer for the U.S. Office of Strategic Services during the Second
World War. Called Agent 488, he worked with Allen W. Dulles, brother
of John Foster Dulles and later the first director of the Central
Intelligence Agency. Dulles later said, “Nobody will probably ever
know how much Prof. Jung contributed to the allied cause during the
war.” Jung was not essentially political. His attachment to
learned, liberal European culture was profound. His primary interests
were the interior life and psyche, human and cosmic longings, and the
ability of civilization to survive modernity.
Gilbert
T. Sewall is co-author of After Hiroshima: The United States Since
1945 and editor of The Eighties: A Reader.
Here is a lecture on Jung by Peterson
Carl Jung: "The world hangs on a thin thread...."
Video
of Carl Jung's famous statement:
"The
world hangs by a thin thread, and that thread is the psyche of
man.... Nowadays, we are not threatened by elemental
catastrophes.... WE are the great danger. The psyche is the great
danger. What if something goes wrong with the psyche? And so it is
demonstrated in our day what the power of the psyche is, how
important it is to know something about it. But we know nothing."
(From "A Matter of Heart")
[Note:
when Jung says here, "Nowadays we are not threatened by
elemental catastrophes...." he means that the greatest threats
facing us are all human-caused (e.g., in his time, nuclear war; and
now additionally climate change, biodiversity loss, ocean
acidification, and other environmental catastrophes), and thus that
the greatest threats facing us are at their root problems of HUMAN
PSYCHOLOGY.]
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.