This is a supplemental site to jungiancenter.org. If you have found this site through blogging, check out our Web site. Here you will find a full description of the Jungian Center, who we are, what we do and what we offer. 2010-09-01T22:55:14-05:00 Copyright 2004-2005 Ublog Reload 1.0.5 smehrtens smehrtens@potlatchgroup.com http://jungiancenter.org/blog/blog_comment.asp?bi=50 2010-09-01T22:55:14-05:00 2010-09-01T22:55:14-05:00 2010-09-01T22:55:14-05:00 Materialism, Scientism and Jung’s Empiricism

“What most people overlook or seem unable to understand is the fact that I regard the psyche as real…”
“The ‘reality of the psyche’ is my working hypothesis, and my principal activity consists in collecting factual material to describe and explain it. I have set up neither a system nor a general theory, but have merely formulated auxiliary concepts to serve me as tools, as is customary in every branch of science.”
“You seem to forget that I am first and foremost an empiricist,…”

Jung struggled throughout his life to be understood for what he was—a true scientist—and for what his empirical method told him was true—that the psyche is real. Why was this? Why such a struggle? And why is this? Why is it that many people (especially in academia and science) still regard Jung as a “mystic,” not a scientist? Why do so many still fail to understand Jung when he spoke of the psyche as real? Even at the Jungian Center, where one might expect to find people open to and interested in Jung’s ideas, I frequently find blank expressions on students’ faces when I speak about the reality of the psyche.
This blog essay considers Jung’s dilemma in trying to get people to understand how he worked and what he found in his explorations of the inner life. We will begin by examining the dominant philosophy of our culture (materialism) and the “knowledge base” of our society (scientism) and then we’ll consider Jung’s form of science (empiricism) and how it differs from scientism. Finally we will examine Jung’s concept of the psyche, its features and centrality to Jung’s psychology.

Materialism: Why Few People Regard the Psyche as Real

The etymology or origins of the word “materialism” go way back thousands of years to the Indo-European root ma. “Matter,” “material,” “money” and “mother” all come from this root, all of these words referring to that which has physical form or substance. We got our word “materialism” from Latin materia, the “-ism” coming along in the 18th century as part of the Enlightenment’s quest to escape the ideological clutches of the Church.
Dictionaries amplify the root meaning of “materialism,” defining it as:
“the belief that all action, thought and feeling can be explained by the movements and changes of matter;…”
“the tendency to care too much for the things of this world and neglect spiritual needs;…”
“the ethical doctrine that material self-interest should and does determine conduct.”
“the doctrine that nothing exists except matter and its movements and modifications…”
“the doctrine that consciousness and will are wholly due to the operation of material agencies…”
“a tendency to prefer material possessions and physical comfort to spiritual values; …”
“a way of life based on material interests.”
The astrophysicist Bernard Haisch defines “materialism” as “… the belief that reality consists solely of matter and energy, the things that can be measured in the laboratory or observed by a telescope. Everything else is illusion or imagination….” The underlying assumption here is that “… everything will eventually be explainable in terms of electrical currents, chemical reactions, or yet-to-be-discovered physical laws—mind and spirit are mere epiphenomena.”
I think the most overarching definition—the one most closely related to our purposes here—is the description of “materialism” as “the present-day physical model of reality that matter is all there is and all there can be.” Intangibles like ideas, love, beauty, spirit, aren’t real. This denigration of intangibles has some serious implications, which we will consider below. Before discussing them, let’s examine some of the components of materialism.
Two of the most important elements of materialism are reductionism and randomness. Reductionism is the belief that a complex system (like a living being) can be understood by reducing it to its constituent parts. You want to understand an ecosystem? Just identify all the various parts of it and study each one and presto! You’ll have it figured out. The idea that a living thing might actually be more than the sum of its parts—that it might have “emergent properties” —is never considered in the reductionist’s mind-set.
Randomness is the belief that “… natural processes follow the laws of chance.” The Universe and everything in it (including you and me!) are here because of random happenstance. There is no meaning, no purpose and no destiny in life. There is also no free will, since we all are mere creatures of chance. From this it logically follows that there is no god, no Divine intention or higher power working in the world. Materialism as our culture’s current paradigm is atheistic.
It is also committed to rationalism, putting a premium on logic, the use of reason, the dismissal of superstition, and the denigration of what cannot be proven through the use of left-brain, linear mental processes (e.g. religion). This vaunting of reason leads to concoctions that warm the hearts of economists, like Rational Economic Man. Rational Economic Man (this means you and me, in the materialists’ theory) lives by utilitarian values. That is, when you and I go to the store to buy something, or when we invest our money or decide how to spend our time, we do what works for us, we determine right from wrong based on whether the action will get us what we want. We do what is in our best self-interest. The result? An ethics of expediency (if something gets us what we want, or makes piles of money, it’s right) and the greed of consumerism.
These are some of the implications of materialism. Others include the repression of meaning and true satisfaction in life (because “He who dies with the most toys, wins!” is a spiritually deadening philosophy). By killing the spiritual side of our humanity materialism fosters a sense of meaninglessness, which leads to depression and despair. Jung remarked on this when he said:
Many hundreds of patients have passed through my hands… Among all my patients in the second half of life—that is to say, over thirty-five—there has not been one whose problem in the last resort was not that of finding a religious outlook on life. It is safe to say that every one of them fell ill because he had lost what the living religions of every age have given to their followers, and none of them has been really healed who did not regain his religious outlook. This of course has nothing whatever to do with a particular creed or membership of a church.
Materialism also distorts perception, by making it difficult, if not impossible for most people in Western societies to value non-material experiences, like psi phenomena. One of the most frustrating aspects of teaching the “Developing Your High Sense Perception” workshop for me has been dealing with the profound disempowerment my students have endured thanks to this implication of materialism. Students stare at me in disbelief when I assure them that they can see auras, can read someone’s energy field, can access their higher (intangible) guidance. Materialism has brainwashed us to the point of deluding us about our true abilities! As a model, or paradigm, of reality, materialism colors our culture, influences our habitual way of perceiving things, forms our values and restricts our sense of what is possible.
It has also led to profound cultural pathology. We see this in our health care crisis (leading so many to focus entirely on the body and to insist on all sorts of heroic measures to stave off death); in the epidemic of drug and substance abuse (pernicious ways to block out a sense of despair or meaninglessness); in the pervasive greed of our culture of “consumeritis;” and in all the ways our environment is being degraded (in all the lamentations about the recent oil spill in the Gulf how many people have called us on our addiction to petroleum?).
Such pathologies spark criticism. The Dalai Lama, for example, reminds us that “The view that all mental processes are necessarily physical processes is a metaphysical assumption, not a scientific fact.” Some 80 years before His Holiness wrote these words, Jung took materialism to task:
The dogma that “mental diseases are diseases of the brain” is a hangover from the materialism of the 1870’s. It has become a prejudice which hinders all progress, with nothing to justify it. Even if it were true that all mental diseases are diseases of the brain, that would still be no reason for not investigating the psychic side of the disease. But the prejudice is used to discredit at the outset all attempts in this direction and to strike them dead. Yet the proof that all mental diseases are diseases of the brain has never been furnished and never can be furnished,… for life can never be thought of as a function of matter, but only as a process existing in and for itself, to which energy and matter are subordinate… people… continue to regard the physical hypothesis as “scientific,” although it is no less fantastic [than vitalism]. But it fits in with the materialistic prejudice,… Let us hope that the time is not far off when this antiquated relic of ingrained and thoughtless materialism will be eradicated from the minds of our scientists.
Jung wrote this in 1916. Ninety years later, materialism still has a stranglehold in our Western world, in large part because it is a core element in the “knowledge base” of our culture. This “knowledge base” is scientism.

Scientism: Why Jung Got Labeled a “Mystic”

Note the word: “scientism,” not “science.” What’s the difference? “Science,” as its etymology implies, means “knowing,” or a way of discovery that is an open-ended, unbiased search for the truth. But scientism is neither open-ended nor unbiased. Rather it is a “kind of orthodoxy,” dogmatic and dismissive of experiences that don’t fit within its belief system. And its belief system is rigid, barring “genuine skepticism, [and] an honest search for better truths,…” As a “degeneration” or “perversion of genuine science,” scientism “tends to reduce all reality and experience to mathematical descriptions of physical and chemical phenomena.” Abraham Maslow, the founder of humanistic psychology, regarded scientism as “one of the most effective and prestigious neurotic defense mechanisms available” in our modern world, functioning for its practitioners as a “security system, a kind of self-cloistering, a complicated way of avoiding anxiety and upsetting problems….” As a “dogma… claiming to be the ultimate and final truth about everything,” scientism is the “consensus reality orientation” of our culture.
Materialism and reductionism are two of the components of scientism. Others include:
objectivism—the insistence on objectivity and facts stripped of all emotions (what I call the Joe Friday syndrome: “Gimme the facts, ma’am, just the facts.”) “pseudoskepticism” —the perversion of true skepticism that turns into debunking whatever does not fit into the scientistic worldview
quantification —putting great faith in number-crunching and the use of “quants” (the terrible results of which we have seen recently in the economic meltdown of 2007-8, built upon quants’ not-so-clever creations)
mechanism—regarding the machine as the model of reality (hence “spare-parts” medicine)
determinism—the idea that everything is determined, without free will
the “pathologies of cognition,” Abraham Maslow’s term for the 21 ways that scientism warps our perception
prejudices—against religion, spirituality, idealism, intuition or “noetic knowing,” and psi phenomena
“image investments”—a host of defenses against seeming to be ignorant or unable to provide answers to what’s going on
arrogance
“training into orthodoxy” —Henryk Skolimowski’s term for the years-long period of training which graduate students undergo that inculcates the beliefs of scientism and squeezes out “heresies” like belief in intangibles
If, by this point, you are beginning to wonder if scientism has the scent of some sort of religion, consider that it even has a mantra, which goes like this:
Science tells us about physical reality. It cannot tell us anything about any possible non-physical realities. Since non-physical realities cannot be investigated by science, they do not exist. End of story.
Such a mantra does not go unchallenged, even by some prominent scientists. For example, Bernard Haisch, astrophysicist, researcher and author of scores of scientific papers, recognizes that, as a model of reality, scientism “… explains away the reality of even [our] own thoughts,” and far from being the unbiased exploration of reality, it “… has abrogated its responsibility to uncover objective truth” and “… has succumbed to a dogmatism of its own.” Charles Tart notes the destructive results of scientism, as it “hinders progress in all areas of science… inhibiting new ways of thinking,…” and “…denying or invalidating the spiritual… longing and experiences…” of people. Its influence is especially pernicious because it arrogates to itself the “power and prestige” that we have given to science, as the knowledge base of our culture.
It is this grip that scientism has on our culture that has led to Jung and analytical psychology being ignored almost completely in the sylvan grooves of academe. Ninety years ago Jung challenged scientists:
It is really high time academic psychologists came down to earth and wanted to hear about the human psyche as it really is and not merely about laboratory experiments. It is insufferable that professors should forbid their students to have anything to do with analytical psychology, that they should prohibit the use of analytical concepts and accuse our psychology of taking account, in an unscientific manner, of “everyday experiences.” I know that psychology in general could derive the greatest benefit from a serious study of the dream problem once it could rid itself of the unjustified lay prejudice that dreams are caused solely by somatic stimuli…
Jung recognized that dreams arose from more than just physical causes. He came to this and his other discoveries as a true scientist, using empiricism as his method.

Empiricism: Jung as a True Scientist

“Empiricism” comes from the Greek word empeirikos, meaning “experience” or “experiment.” It is defined in dictionaries as “the use of methods based on experiment and observation.” Real scientists (i.e. not practitioners of scientism) regard empiricism as “genuine science,” “an open-ended, error-correcting, personal-growth system of great power.” It is a method posited on the belief that “direct inner experience… trumps logic and proof.”
Time and again in his essays, letters and interviews Jung called himself an empiricist:
“… I am first and foremost an empiricist.”
“… I was particularly satisfied with the fact that you clearly understood that I am not a mystic but an empiricist.”
“… I am not a philosopher, I’m an empiricist.”
And his methodology backed up his claim. Doing science—true science—begins with observation. It asks “What’s going on?” and proceeds to observe with an open mind. Data collection from direct personal observation and experience leads to the formulation of a hypothesis. Then the empiricist communicates his/her findings, sharing data so others can provide further insights, feedback and reports on their experiences with similar data. This leads to refinement of the hypothesis, further data collection, more sharing of results, and more refinement, until the collaborating group comes to conclude that the tentative hypothesis is likely to be valid. The whole process is inductive, i.e. it proceeds from the facts to a conclusion—the opposite of deduction, where one starts with a belief and then seeks out facts that support it.
Jung described how he worked in several passages in his letters:
“The empiricist does not think from above downwards from metaphysical premises, but comes from below upwards from the phenomenal world,…” (This is the way of induction).
“… the empiricist… in order to do justice to his task, can appeal to nothing except the given realities.” (He focuses on facts, not theories).
“… our empirical psychology is based entirely on the experience of individual cases,…” (Rather than try to fit people into some arbitrary theory, Jung began by taking each patient as an individual, with a unique set of experiences).
“One should not misconstrue the findings of empiricism as philosophical premises, for they are not obtained by deduction but from clinical and factual material.” (Jung got the material for his psychological system from his own experiences and those of his patients).
“The point of view I have adopted is that of modern empirical psychology and the scientific method… Psychology cannot establish any metaphysical “truths,” nor does it try to. It is concerned solely with the phenomenology of the psyche…. For modern psychology, ideas are entities, like animals and plants. The scientific method consists in the description of nature.”
And part of nature, Jung argued, is intangible. Here is where Jung parted company with materialism and scientism: Intangibles—like ideas, dreams, the psyche—are real. They exist. We deny their existence at our—and our society’s—peril.

The Psyche, Its Features and Role in Jung’s Thought

“Psyche” means “soul” in Greek. In some places in his writing Jung uses the two terms interchangeably. For example in his essay “Psychology and Alchemy,” he writes:
…with Western man the value of the self sinks to zero. Hence the universal depreciation of the soul in the West. Whoever speaks of the reality of the soul or psyche is accused of “psychologism.”
From our discussion of materialism and scientism, we can understand why Jung was so often accused of “psychologism.”
Elsewhere Jung describes the psyche as “peculiar.” Autonomous and unconscious, it is mostly unknown to us, and beyond our ability to fully grasp. While it is linked to both the organic and inorganic worlds, it is independent of physical data to some extent, and it has the curious ability to relativize both time and space (i.e. it plays a role in psi phenomena). As “… a complex whole actuated not only by instinctual processes and personal relationships but by the spiritual needs and suprapersonal currents of the time,…” the psyche in its “creative capacity,” opposes entropy (the principle in thermodynamics that postulates increasing disorder in a system over time). Because of the action of the psyche, living systems are “negentropic,” i.e. they are able to maintain a state of order or equilibrium while they are alive.
Maintaining equilibrium is another feature of Jung’s image of the psyche. He notes repeatedly that “… the psyche is a self-regulating system, just as the body is,…” As a quality of matter, the psyche is dependent on the body’s nervous system. It has a structure and is accessible to the scientist through empirical methods.
What role does the psyche play in Jung’s thought? Before addressing this question, we might well recall what we discussed above. “Psychiatry” and “psychology” both come from the root word “psyche.” This suggests that, in any form of psychiatric or psychological activity, the psyche would be the central focus. But in actuality, due to the pernicious influence of materialism and scientism, the vast majority of psychiatric training programs, college departments of psychology, and state boards of mental health licensure act as if “psyche” has no place in their work! The psyche being an intangible, they ignore or dismiss it. They are so locked into the materialist ethos that they can’t recognize the core element in their profession.
Jung, of course, is different. He recognized the psyche as one of the three central elements of his system:
… the structure of opposites and their symbolism, the anima archetype, and … the unavoidable encounter with the reality of the psyche… these three main points play an essential role in my psychology,…
Elsewhere Jung called the psyche “… reality par excellence,” the “auctor rerum… the ground and substrate” of reality, “…the greatest of all cosmic wonders and the sine qua non of the world as an object.”
Jung went further than these encomiums in his regard for the psyche. He regarded it as “the world’s pivot:… the one great condition for the existence of the world,” and the factor upon which the future of the world depends:
… nowadays particularly, the world hangs by a thin thread, and that thread is the psyche of man.” “We are the great danger. The psyche is the great danger…
When asked about our prospects, Jung put the psyche front and center:
… the careful consideration of psychic factors is of importance in restoring not merely the individual’s balance, but society’s as well. Otherwise the destructive tendencies easily gain the upper hand. In the same way that the atom-bomb is an unparalleled means of physical mass destruction, so the misguided development of the soul must lead to psychic mass destruction.
Jung was not sanguine about the future of the world, as I have noted in earlier blog essays. He continued his remarks above with this warning:
The present situation is so sinister that one cannot suppress the suspicion that the Creator is planning another deluge that will finally exterminate the existing race of men.
If we want to rise to the challenge facing us in these critical times, Jung would ask us to turn within, to our souls, to the psychic reality that is at the root of our being. Stand up to the foolishness of materialism and the life-killing stupidity of scientism! These features of our contemporary world are the most fearsome weapon of mass destruction we face now, all the more threatening because they are unrecognized as such.
How do you come to learn for yourself that the psyche is real? Trust your own experience, work with your dreams, pay attention to your inner life, and turn a deaf ear to the scientistic materialists! (This will require some independence of thought, as our society is deeply permeated with scientism). Listen to Jung and follow his example of relying on your own inner wisdom, and you too will come to know what Jung knew: that the psyche is real.

Bibliography

Griffin, David (1996), “A Postmodern Science,” Revisioning Science, ed. Susan Mehrtens. Waterbury VT: The Potlatch Press.
Haisch, Bernard (2006), The God Theory. San Francisco: Weiser Books.
Harman, Willis (1988), Global Mind Change. Indianapolis: Knowledge Systems.
Hergenhahn, B.R. (1994), An Introduction to Theories of Personality. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Jung, C.G. (1960), ”The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche,” CW 8. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1959), “Aion,” Collected Works, 9ii. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1970), “Civilization in Transition,” CW 10. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1969), “Psychology and Religion: West and East,” CW 11. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1953), “Psychology and Alchemy,” CW 12. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1976), ”The Symbolic Life,” CW 18. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1973), Letters, ed. Gerhard Adler & Aniela Jaffé. 2 vols. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1977), C.G. Jung Speaking: Interviews and Encounters, ed. William McGuire & R.F.C. Hull. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Lewis, Michael (2010), The Big Short. New York: W.W. Norton.
Lewis, Charlton & Charles Short (1969), A Latin Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Markopolos, Harry (2010), No One Would Listen. Hoboken NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Moelaert, John (1974), “The Epidemic in Our Midst,” Earthkeeping: Readings in Human Ecology, eds. Charles Juzek & Susan Mehrtens. Pacific Grove CA: The Boxwood Press.
Sharf, Richard (1996), Theories of Psychotherapy and Counseling: Concepts and Cases. New York: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
Skolimowski, Henryk (1996), “The Methodology of Participation,” Revisioning Science, ed. Susan Mehrtens. Waterbury VT: The Potlatch Press.
Solomon, Deborah (2010), “Math Is Hard: Questions for Harry Markopolos,” The New York Times Magazine (February 28, 2010), 14.
Tart, Charles (2009), The End of Materialism. Oakland CA: New Harbinger Publications.






]]> smehrtens smehrtens@potlatchgroup.com http://jungiancenter.org/blog/blog_comment.asp?bi=49 2010-08-01T10:06:38-05:00 2010-08-01T10:06:38-05:00 2010-08-01T10:06:38-05:00 C.G. Jung, 1938
“For a long time I have advocated schools for the adult…”
C.G. Jung, 1960

A series of dreams in July 2005 led to the creation of the Jungian Center for the Spiritual Sciences. Dozens of dreams since then have supported it, added to its curriculum and widened its scope. I have always intuitively felt that Jung would approve of this endeavor but it is only recently, in reading Jung’s works to prepare a course on Jungian parenting that I came across his explicit statements—like those quoted above—in support of the Center’s type of educational organization.
In this essay we will consider Jung’s thoughts and preferences about how education should be conducted, and the distinction between “instruction” and “education.” Then we will examine what Jung regarded as the two halves of life and their different concerns, followed by discussions of the tasks, components and goals of adult education in a Jungian framework, and what the consequences or results of such an education might be. Lastly, we’ll discuss some of the ways the Jungian Center serves the adult learner and his/her needs.

“Instruction,” “Education” and Jung’s Thoughts on the Proper Form of Education

It is common in American society to use “instruction” and “education” interchangeably to refer to what goes on in those buildings we identify as “schools.” But in etymology, practice and their image of the learner, the two terms could not be more different. “Instruction” comes from the Latin verb instruere, meaning “to pile on.” When we “instruct” students we “pile on” them the facts, figures, techniques, and information that we feel they need to have to cope with the demands of modern life. This is essentially a one-way, teacher- or subject-centered process. It is, to some degree at least, unavoidable, since no one is born able to do sums, parse sentences, read, write, or find France on a map.
Jung recognized the necessity of instruction when he wrote that “youth… must find outside” those things it needs to acquire in order to function and flourish in contemporary society. While he admitted that modern life demanded some technical training (a trend that has intensified in a major way in the 50 years since his death), he preferred a school system oriented more to the historical and humanistic subjects, rather than the “scientific worldview, with its statistical truths….” In general, he was quite critical of most forms of education, because teachers lacked self-knowledge, the children sensed this and the result was that they came away from their studies lacking “a sense of authority, robbed of their individual nature and halted in the development of their personality.” So, while Jung knew instruction had its place, he also knew it must not be the sole form of learning, and this is especially true for the adult learner. For adults—persons at or after mid-life—a much more suitable form of learning is education.
Our English word “education” derives from the Latin exducere, meaning “to draw forth.” When we “educate” we draw out of the student what is within. This is a student-centered, dialectical process, requiring one-on-one dialog and interaction between student and teacher. It is student motivated and self-directed and reflects the shift in focus that Jung felt was a key feature of mid-life—a shift away from a preoccupation with outer reality toward a focus on one’s inner life. Jung described it in these words: “What youth found and must find outside, the man of life’s afternoon must find within himself.” As a process of recognizing and then drawing forth that which is within, education can do this; instruction cannot. So when we speak of “adult education” we are speaking about education, rather than instruction.

The Two Halves of Life and Their Different Concerns

As we noted above, Jung felt that people in the first half of life were concerned with externals: training for work and parenthood, making a living, raising a family, acquiring the material wherewithal that would support a decent life. Jung termed all these things of the “biological sphere.”
By contrast, Jung felt people in mid-life (c. age 40, usually timed when transiting Uranus comes to oppose one’s natal Uranus) and beyond were to shift their focus away from the biological to the “cultural sphere.” This shift came with a host of different concerns from earlier life: the biological instincts were subordinated to cultural goals; mental and emotional energies had to be expended to making a successful mid-life transition (a transition that is not always an easy passage); and the adult had to navigate a reorientation from regarding life as a series of ascents to recognizing the reality of descending and diminishing energies and capacities.
Jung recognized that a variety of questions commonly characterized the mid-life passage. These include such queries as:
“Where am I standing today?”
“Have my dreams come true?”
“Have I fulfilled my expectations of a happy and successful life as I imagined them 20 years ago?”
“Have I been … intelligent, reliable and enduring enough to seize my opportunities or to make the right choice at the crossroads and produce the proper answer to the problems which fate or fortune put before me?”
“What is the chance that I shall fail again in fulfilling that which I obviously have been unable to accomplish in the first 40 years?”
Some people who spend their first 4 decades striving for material success find mid-life full of confusion, disillusionment or loss of meaning. They wonder “Is this all there is?” “With all that I’ve got, why don’t I feel satisfied?” “Why does my life feel so flat, blah, empty?” “Where’s the ‘juice,’ the excitement I used to feel?” “What’s it all mean?” Helping adult learners deal with questions like these is one of the tasks of adult education.

The Tasks of Adult Education

Providing venues within which adults can grapple with the common questions that arise at mid-life is just one of the tasks of adult education. Others include encouragement: Adults need to be encouraged to look within, so as to discover their true self and the Self (Jung’s term for the Divine within). By looking within, the adult learner can see all that he or she is meant to be and what he or she is living from and living for. Adults also need to be encouraged to fantasize, since fantasy and imagination hold the germs of new goals and can open up new possibilities. Adults need encouragement, also, to play with these new possibilities and a variety of forms of creativity that they may, in earlier life, have regarded as “frivolous” or “fun, but not a way to make money.”
Support is another task of adult education. In Jung’s schema, adult education should support people in developing “new eyes which see them [i.e. new goals] and a new heart which desires them [new goals].” Adults need support to gain “an ever-deepening self-knowledge,” and to live their unique life, independent of (and sometimes in direct contradiction to) a host of scripts and rules laid down by parents, teachers and other authority figures back in childhood.
Adult education has other tasks: To foster life renewal, to provide “spiritual nutrition” and “spiritual guidance,” and to provide companionship and a sense of belonging to a community of like-minded individuals in the face of the isolation that is an inevitable consequence of a person’s developing his/her personality.

Components of Adult Education

Jung felt that adult education had to be individualized, indirect and self-directed. That is, it should avoid the collective form found in conventional public elementary, secondary and college settings. It should be “indirect” in that it would set out the range of learning opportunities but rest on the motivation of the adult learner to pick and choose what he or she feels drawn toward. And it was to be self-directed, self-paced and centered on the learner, rather than the teacher or the subject.
Student-centeredness is part of another component of adult education: participatory methodology. I have taken this term from Henryk Skolimowski, who used it in the context of scientific experimentation, to refer to a more subjective, personal involvement with the object of one’s research, à la scientists like Barbara McClintock, who won the Nobel Prize in 1983 for her research on corn genes that she conducted by having “a feeling for the organism.” Like Skolimowski, Jung would challenge the objectivist viewpoint of modern science in his insistence that analysts, and teachers, recognize their basic identity with the client or student. We are all “in the soup together,” jointly learning, sharing and growing.
Independent thinking is another component of adult education. Unlike children, adults can and must think for themselves. By mid-life, Jung felt adults should have developed inner loci of control and authority, and should have acquired a capacity for critical thinking and the ability to discern what is appropriate for themselves. Jung was adamant that an adult learner must listen to his or her own nature. This is possible due to another key component of adult education: attention to the inner life.
Adult learning, in a Jungian model, must include the unconscious. Jung was explicit about this. How was this to be done? Jung felt one of the best methods was through the study of one’s dreams. Jung was convinced that people can be taught to work with their dreams, that one need not become a professional, certified Jungian analyst to be able to figure out the meaning of dreams. Our dream classes at the Jungian Center bear this out: our students learn the language of the soul, learn how to decipher their dreams. You too can come to know the truth about yourself through study of your dreams.

Goals of Adult Education

Why undertake adult education? Some people get into it out of desperation, when their mid-life passage has become so fraught with confusion and disorientation that the need for greater self-awareness cannot be gainsaid. Others have an easier time making the transition into mid-life. For them the goal might be to educate the personality so as to produce “a well-rounded psychic whole that is capable of resistance and abounding in energy.”
Jung recognized that adult education could also satisfy the “eternal child within” all of us, that part of us “that is always becoming, is never completed, and calls for unceasing care, attention and education…”. If properly crafted and presented, adult education also allows the inner child to play, re-create, relax and let go, perhaps in ways the adult has never felt able to do before in his or her life.
A fourth goal for adult learning is to create that self-knowledge that permits a person to “walk his talk” and move into his authentic being, with true authority. Such a process produces a “fuller consciousness.”
A final goal is spiritual. Jung described this goal as “conveying the archetype of the God-image, or its emanations and effects to the conscious mind,” thus helping to root the adult learner in a larger spiritual matrix. This process brings a greater sense of meaning, purpose and direction to life.

Consequences of Adult Education in the Jungian Framework

What results when adults undertake Jungian-oriented education? As noted above, one result is self-knowledge: awareness of one’s shadow side, persona, animus/anima, and the Self, along with the recognition of one’s creative inner daimon, and an understanding of what has purchase on one’s soul.
Another consequence is the ability to live authentically. Actions align with rhetoric, and the individual radiates a genuineness that others find compelling, attractive and inspiring.
As the adult learner wises up to his/her inner “tapes” and scripts and sets aside those that are inappropriate, he or she moves more deeply into his/her authority. True authority flows from an inner awareness of the ego-Self relation and from the alignment of the ego will with the intentions of the Self.
All the above are positive results. There is another, mentioned earlier, which is not so positive: isolation. Jung recognized that only a “leading minority” are likely to achieve self-knowledge. Lots of adults take classes; few undertake the soul journey that leads to deep transformation. Given the materialism and unconsciousness of modern culture (especially in the United States)—two features of modern reality that have only gotten worse in the 5 decades since Jung died—few people will understand or appreciate those who take up Jung’s path of adult education. Those who do take this path face the fate of being isolated, acutely aware of the gulf that separates them from family, friends and associates. As was noted in an earlier essay on this blog site, this is one reason why educational organizations like the Jungian Center are so essential: so the “awake” few have a place to go to find others who understand and share their interests, focus, awareness and concerns.

How the Jungian Center Serves the Adult Learner

Providing social opportunities through classes, workshops, and the Psychology Club is just one way the Jungian Center serves adult learners. Another way is through the variety of classes that encourage and require introspection, e.g. Introduction to Dream Work, Jungian Dream Theory, Shadow Work, Meeting Your Inner Partner, Finding Your Mission in Life, The Path of Individuation, Developing Your Intuition, Developing Spiritual Literacy, and The Creation of Consciousness.
The Center also supports personal growth through independent studies, in a one-on-one format with a faculty member, tailored to individual interests and needs. Such independent studies can be taken on-site or via our Distance Learning option, which brings most of our courses to the far-off adult learner in an individualized format.
Finally, the Center is responsive to our students who have suggested many of the courses now being taught. Their needs and interests are now driving the curriculum, as we strive to measure up to Jung’s vision of a school of Self-directed study.

Bibliography

Brewi, Janice & Anne Brennan (1988), Celebrate Mid-Life: Jungian Archetypes and Mid-Life Spirituality. New York: Crossroad Press.
Hollis, James (1993), The Middle Passage: From Misery to Meaning in Midlife. Toronto: Inner City Books
________ (1996), Swamplands of the Soul: New Life in Dismal Places. Toronto: Inner City Books
Jung, C.G. (1977), C.G. Jung Speaking: Interviews and Encounters, ed. William McGuire & R.F.C. Hull. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1966), “Two Essays on Analytical Psychology,” CW 7. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1960), ”The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche,” CW 8. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1970), “Civilization in Transition,” CW 10. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1953), “Psychology and Alchemy,” CW 12. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1954), “The Practice of Psychotherapy,” CW 16, 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1954), “The Development of Personality,” CW 17. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1976), ”The Symbolic Life,” CW 18. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Keller, Evelyn Fox (1983), A Feeling for the Organism: The Life and Work of Barbara McClintock. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Prétat, Jane (1994), Coming to Age: The Croning Years and Late-Life Transformation. Toronto: Inner City Books
Qualls-Corbet, Nancy (1988), The Sacred Prostitute: Eternal Aspect of the Feminine. Toronto: Inner City Books
Sharp, Daryl (1988), The Survival Papers: Anatomy of the Midlife Crisis. Toronto: Inner City Books
________ (1989), Dear Gladys: The Survival Papers, Book 2. Toronto: Inner City Books
________ (1992), Getting to Know You: The Inside Out of Relationship. Toronto: Inner City Books
Skolimowski, Henryk (1996), “The Methodology of Participation,” Revisioning Science:Essays Toward a New Knowledge Base for Our Culture, ed. S. Mehrtens. Waterbury VT: The Potlatch Press.
Stein, Murray (1983), In Midlife: A Jungian Perspective. Dallas TX: Spring Publications.]]> smehrtens smehrtens@potlatchgroup.com http://jungiancenter.org/blog/blog_comment.asp?bi=48 2010-07-03T09:20:39-05:00 2010-07-03T09:20:39-05:00 2010-07-03T09:20:39-05:00
Earlier essays on this blog site described some of the components of individuation and defined it as
… a developmental process which begins in the adult individual, usually after the age of thirty-five, and if successful leads to the discovery of the Self and its replacing of the ego as the personality center. Individuation is the discovery of and the extended dialogue with the objective psyche of which the Self is the comprehensive expression.
Perhaps because it seems similar to “individualism,” or perhaps because American society is so biased toward that philosophy of “each for himself,” many people assume that individuation implies a preoccupation with oneself, selfishness and social isolation. But this is not true at all. Far from fostering selfishness and self-absorption, individuation promotes a greater sense of social concern and responsibility in the person who has taken the spiritual journey. This essay seeks to clarify Jung’s attitudes in this regard, beginning with his warnings about the dangers of immersion in the “mass psychology” of groups.

Jung on the Dangers of Groups

In the essay “Jung’s Timeliness and Thoughts on Our Current Reality,” we noted Jung’s concern about how easily individuals could become identified with groups and thus loose their individuality, as well as their personal moral stance. Over and over Jung decried the tendency for the psyche of the group—the collective psyche—to overwhelm or submerge the individual’s psyche, especially if the group is large. Jung felt that the larger the group, the more readily the individual would get lost in it, and the lower the level of morality that would manifest. So Jung concluded that
…every man is, in a certain sense, unconsciously a worse man when he is in society than when acting alone; for he is carried by society and to that extent relieved of his individual responsibility.
Jung felt that, even when a large group was composed of “wholly admirable persons,” it would still have the “morality and intelligence of an unwieldy, stupid, and violent animal.” Clearly, Jung had little use for large groups!
Not just large groups were at issue: Jung also recognized that the person undertaking the path of individuation would have to “differentiate” him/herself from smaller groups—the family, circles of friends, ethnic and other collectives. This is because individuation requires giving up persona stuff—the host of social expectations and inauthentic roles that the individual has acquired unconsciously over time.
Does this mean that Jung expected individuated people to live in some sort of social isolation? Not at all.

Jung on the Consequences of Individuation

Jung recognized that human beings are social creatures and society is a “necessary condition” for us. Each of us is part of the whole web of life and the process of individuating makes one aware of this wholeness and the unity of all. The process also makes us aware of the unconscious, which—in Jung’s concept of the “collective unconscious”—is common to all humankind. The individuated person is “at-one-ment” with him/herself and also with humanity. Working toward individuation leads us to a deeper sense of connection with others and fosters a desire to serve others.
But because the process of individuating entails being “born out” of identity with family, tribe, ethnic group etc., the individuated person does not fall back into his or her original social network. Time and again as I work with students at the Jungian Center I hear them note how they have found themselves creating new friendships and new social networks. Their old friends seem not to have similar interests or outlook. “As within, so without:” having changed inwardly, individuating people discover that outer life also changes, including their social contacts and friendships.

The “Leading Minority” and the Need for Community

“Leading minority” was Jung’s term for those awake, those persons who had undertaken to look within and become conscious of the unconscious. Both then and now, there aren’t a lot of people who have done this. Western society, and especially American society with its strong ESTJ bias, is not inclined toward introspection or introversion. People stepping out of the mainstream to discover the unconscious and develop their individual uniqueness are few and far between, and they often wind up feeling “different” or isolated, until they link up with like-minded individuals.
Toni Wolff, Jung’s “friend and collaborator” saw this need to link up with other individuating people and got Jung to agree to the formation of the Psychology Club of Zurich. Funded with a gift of 360,000 Swiss francs from Edith Rockefeller McCormack in 1916, the Club provided Jung with the opportunity to do a “silent experiment” in group psychology. Jung also saw it as the antidote to the “onesidedness” of the analytic process.
Jung noted that “Human personality is certainly not individual only, it is also collective,…” and we need contact with others. Years later, as Jung Institutes were created in various cities around the world, there has been the “spontaneous phenomenon” of similar clubs being formed by analysands and others interested in Jung and his ideas.
One such club recently formed at The Jungian Center for the Spiritual Sciences. The shared experience of Jung and his deep effect on individuals committed to their growth has brought people together to share fun, fellowship (and food!), as well as stimulating intellectual exchange of Jung-related ideas. Such clubs become for their members what Edward Edinger called an ecclesia spiritualis, a spiritual gathering of those “called out” from the crowd.
If you are reading this essay in some place far from Vermont, and you need the fellowship of others on the path of individuation, here are some ways you might go about finding others who share your interests:
1. Google “Jung Institutes” and you will bring up over 1 million sites related to Jung, some of which will put you on to a locale near you. There are Jung Institutes (i.e. formal organizations of certified Jungian analysts who train therapists to be analysts) in Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Denver, Los Angeles, New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, San Francisco, Santa Fe and Toronto. Many, if not all of these institutes run programs for the public where you can make contacts and develop social networks.
In addition to these Institutes, there are dozens of less formal groups (i.e. not set up to train future analysts)—Jung Societies or Friends of Jung. A cursory scroll through the Google site revealed such groups in Atlanta, Austin, Charlotte, Claremont CA, Cleveland, Colorado Springs, Eugene OR, Fairfield County CT, Houston, Montana, New Orleans, Port Townsend WA, San Antonio, San Diego, Santa Barbara, Seattle, St. Louis, St. Paul and Waco TX.
2. If you don’t live near any of these cities/states, you might find like-minded people interested in Jung through “new age” bookstores, natural food markets, alternative healing centers and their bulletin boards.
The old adage “When the student is ready, the teacher appears.” applies here: when you are ready and aware of your need for the fellowship of others also on the path, such people will appear in your life. Just set the intention to find them, and you will.

Bibliography

Edinger, Edward (2009a), “Individual & Society,” in George Elder & Dianne Cordic, An American Jungian: In Honor of Edward F. Edinger. Toronto: Inner City Books.
________ (2009b), “Jung Distilled,” in George Elder & Dianne Cordic, An American Jungian: In Honor of Edward F. Edinger. Toronto: Inner City Books.
Jung Carl (1960), “The Psychogenesis of Mental Disease,” Collected Works, 3. Princeton University Press.
________ (1956) “Symbols of Transformation,” Collected Works, 5, 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1966), “Two Essays on Analytical Psychology,” CW 7. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1959), ”The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious,” CW 9i. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1970), “Civilization in Transition,” CW 10. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1969), “Psychology and Religion: West and East,” CW 11. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1954), “The Practice of Psychotherapy,” CW 16, 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1976), ”The Symbolic Life,” CW 18. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Keirsey, David & Marilyn Bates (1984), Please Understand Me. Del Mar CA: Prometheus Nemesis Books.
Shamdasani, Sonu, “Introduction,” in Carl Jung, The Red Book: Liber Novus. New York: W.W. Norton, 2009.
Three Initiates (1912), The Kybalion. Chicago: Yogi Publication Society.






]]> smehrtens smehrtens@potlatchgroup.com http://jungiancenter.org/blog/blog_comment.asp?bi=47 2010-05-28T09:47:10-05:00 2010-05-28T09:47:10-05:00 2010-05-28T09:47:10-05:00 A Jungian Approach to Choosing

Those readers of this blog who are on the mailing list of The Jungian Center were informed of the voiceover dream I had on September 22, 2009. The voice said:
October 2010 will be an especially important month, when key choices are made that lay down energy patterns the consequences of which we will reap in the next 2 years.
Given my 26+ year track record with such dreams, I always take them seriously. So very shortly I found myself researching what Jung might have said about choice and choosing. Did he leave us any advice about how to make good choices? And what might constitute a “good” choice, to Jung?
My research revealed that Jung never wrote an essay directly on this topic. There are only references scattered throughout his voluminous writing on the subject. But these references allow us to answer the questions above. Before doing so, let’s address the title: What was “Buridan’s ass” and how does it relate to choosing?

Buridan’s Ass

Jung was very learned and well-read and, as such, was familiar with the paradox in philosophy that goes back well into antiquity, to the time of Aristotle, which was discussed centuries later by the 14th century French philosopher, Jean Buridan. Buridan satirized this paradox, in which a man (in Aristotle) or an ass (in later versions) is positioned exactly between two necessities, food and drink (in Aristotle), two bales of hay (in later versions). Buridan felt that if one got stuck pondering the possible outcomes, one could starve. That is, one’s will could so delay making a choice that, in the extreme, one could die before the choice was made. Jung mentions Buridan’s ass three times in his writings, in contexts that give us insights into his views on choosing.

Jung on Choosing

As Jung saw the paradox of Buridan’s ass, the problem was due either to the ass not being hungry so he didn’t take the problem seriously, or to the creature’s externalizing the task. When we externalize a decision we look to the object to make the choice. Jung recognized that good choices—choices that are aligned with our true being—require us to look within, to the depths of our nature and then, to ask ourselves what we feel drawn toward. We must ask ourselves “What is the natural urge of life, at this moment, for me?”
While for most of us the situation of Buridan’s ass may seem extreme, Jung’s identification of the core issue is right on the mark: When people (especially those who are strong Perceivers) have trouble coming to closure, they do just what Jung described. They look to others or turn over the decision-making to others. Or they leave the decision up to life, Fate, Destiny. Jung regarded this tactic as abdicating responsibility for one’s own life and forfeit the opportunity to learn, grow and live more authentically. So one key component of good choices, for Jung, is looking within and being aware of what we are naturally drawn toward.
Jung also recognized that our sense of “free will”—being able to choose freely—is, to a degree, an illusion. The possible range of choices we face when making a decision is dependent upon (and limited by) the amount of libido (psychic energy) disposable by the ego. The Self is really in charge of our lives, a fact most of us usually forget or prefer to ignore. The ego does not like to face its inferiority. It wants to think it is running the show.
The reality of the ego’s dependence on the Self is usually brought home to us only after years of inner work in which the ego experiences the “defeat” that comes with its experience of the Self. This repeated fixatio experience is never pleasant, but eventually it fosters the ego relinquishing its desire for control.
Free choice Jung defined as a “subjective feeling of freedom,” which is not totally free. Our will comes up constantly against the limits of the outside world and also comes into “conflict with the facts of the self.” As the Self acts on the ego it circumscribes our will.
Then there are the inevitable times in life when we experience what Jung calls “conflicts of duty.” These are those situations where we face a choice between two evils or two unpalatable options. In such times Jung saw 3 possible courses of action:
We might look to some outside authority, thus externalizing our locus of authority, something Jung never encouraged.
We might look to an “act of God,” in the form of a fait accompli, which Jung felt most people regard as the will of God. An example here is that of a woman unable to decide whether to have a child, so she stops using birth control, thinking that if she gets pregnant it will be the will of God.
Neither of these did Jung see as desirable. Rather he suggested that we view such situations as opportunities to discover the power inherent in “holding the tension of opposites” and wait for the resolution of the conflict in the form of the emergence of the “transcendent function.” This is not something the ego figures out; it is done by the Self. So this waiting and holding at various (difficult) times of life provide us with opportunities to experience the Self.
Such times also provide the opportunity for us to recognize our “two-ness,” i.e. how we contain both good and evil, different, often opposite impulses or inclinations, as Saint Paul lamented in his letter to the church in Rome. If we can hold the tension of the “two-ness” Jung felt we would achieve a new attitude.
Jung reminds us that the major problems in life—those times when we face major decisions—are never things we solve. Solutions are the purview of the ego. The ego is way out of its depths here. Such problems are only outgrown. When we wait, holding the tension of opposites, the Self provides a resolution, with the appearance of the reconciling third thing, and this results in a whole new attitude, new perspective, new outlook—in short, in our growth.
Jung also provides us with insights on the subject of choosing in his concept of psychological types. In an earlier essay we discussed the types. For our purposes here two components of type theory are relevant: Intuition and Perception. The MBTI and SLIP, the two major “tests” of type, seek to identify a person’s innate preferences. Those with a strong preference for Intuition (N) are oriented more to the future than to the past, see future possibilities and potentials, and take in information irrationally, without the involvement of the linear, left-brain rational mind. Those with a strong preference for P tend to resist closure, to be disorganized and to prefer to continue to glean perceptions and information.
The person strong in both Intuition and Perceiving tends to have the hardest time with choosing because neither intuition or perceiving provides a base for making a choice. Intuition is irrational; perception does not determine either values (Feeling) or logical facts (Thinking)—the two bases on which we make choices. Type specialists will assure us that no one is an “NP” as a type, that there is always either T or F related here. But in my experience, even when the T/F preference is present, the person with strong inclinations toward N and P can be very indecisive.
Finally Jung offers us insights about choosing in his discussion of archetypes, in particular the archetype of the puer. The word is Latin for “child,” and so is an archetype we all have experienced in our youth. But some people never develop the opposite archetype, the senex, sufficiently to balance the qualities of the puer. Such people live what Jung called “the provisional life” —a life without commitment, a life always containing the opportunity to make an escape, a fantasy life, the life of the child.
Pueri seek to keep their options open. They live spontaneously, relishing fun and excitement. As such they make stimulating friends, but very poor marriage material (although this doesn’t stop some women—especially Kores and Mother types —from finding them irresistibly alluring). Unless the puer grows up, i.e. integrates the senex that lies in the unconscious, he will never become either fond of, or good at choosing.

Why does this matter?

Making good choices is a serious issue now. We as a society are living in a time when we face critical choices. I think my dream of last September was meant to get us to realize this fact. We have to choose on so many fronts, e.g.
how to be responsible with our resources (on both the individual and collective levels)
how to handle the problems in our economy
how best to protect the environment
how best to respond to the reality of terrorism and other challenges we face
how much, or if, to participate in the public discussion of contemporary issues
how best to teach our children sound values
how to choose among the candidates in the coming mid-term elections
We need to be good choosers, so as to make choices that are wise, born from our individual truth, consonant with the guidance of the Self. Jung offers us a wealth of advice on how to do this. He reminds us that
“Who looks outside, dreams. Who looks inside, awakes.
We need to be awake, and aware of who we are, what we value, what the Self is asking of us, and Jung’s perspective is an invaluable aid in good choosing.

Bibliography

Bolen, Jean Shinoda (1984), Goddesses in Everywoman. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
Edinger, Edward (1996), The Aion Lectures: Exploring the Self in C.G. Jung’s Aion. Toronto: Inner City Press.
Giannini, John (2004), Compass of the Soul: Archetypal Guides to a Fuller Life. Gainesville FL: Center for the Application of Psychological Type.
Carl Jung (1961), “Freud and Psychoanalysis,” Collected Works, 4. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1966), “Two Essays on Analytical Psychology,” CW 7. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1959), “Aion,” Collected Works, 9ii. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1970), “Civilization in Transition,” CW 10. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1969), “Psychology and Religion: West and East,” CW 11. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1963), “Mysterium Coniunctionis,” CW 14. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1954), “The Practice of Psychotherapy,” CW 16, 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1973), Letters, ed. Gerhard Adler & Aniela Jaffé. 2 vols. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Keirsey, David & Marilyn Bates (1984), Please Understand Me. Del Mar CA: Prometheus Nemesis Books.
Kroeger, Otto & Janet Thuesen (1988), Type Talk. New York: Dell.
Myers, Isabel Briggs with Peter Myers (1980), Gifts Differing. Palo Alto CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Sharp, Daryl (1998), Jungian Psychology Unplugged: My Life as an Elephant. Toronto: Inner City Press.
Wikipedia, “Buridan’s Ass;” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buridan’s¬_ass
Woodman, Marion (1985), The Pregnant Virgin: A Process of Psychological Transformation. Toronto: Inner City Press.


]]> smehrtens smehrtens@potlatchgroup.com http://jungiancenter.org/blog/blog_comment.asp?bi=46 2010-05-01T01:32:45-05:00 2010-05-01T01:32:45-05:00 2010-05-01T01:32:45-05:00 An Examination of America’s Potential Future in Light of Its Astrological Chart



In previous essays I have made references to possible forms of the future for America and American society. Those essays make it clear that I am not a fan of our current culture, government or society, nor am I very optimistic about the future. In part, this stems from a series of dreams I had back in 2007 and 2008 which suggest some of the challenges we are likely to face in the coming years. In part, my attitude stems from my reading of Native American sources about the actions of the United States government over the last 400 years, and Native predictions about the karmic consequences of those actions. And in part, my attitude stems from my reading of Jung, and his conviction that our collective future will see some sort of “impending world catastrophe.” As people have read the previous essays posted to The Jungian Center’s blog, they have asked me for specifics: what’s coming down? What are we, as a society, looking at in the next few years? And when might we expect the challenging times to arrive?
There are several ways one might address these questions: One way is with the use of Intuitive Imagery, which I have used with several friends who are adept in it. Another way is by consulting the variety of mantic arts, the results of which, on the collective level, often are hard to decipher or interpret. A third way is by watching one’s dream guidance, and beyond just watching, actively seeking the guidance of the psyche through an interactive dream practice. I have done all of these. There is also another source of information, which Jung used on occasion to better understand his patients, and also to study the relationship of married couples. This source is astrology.
Many Americans, nearly all academics, and some of you readers of this blog might at this point start rolling your eyes. Astrology? Astrology!***??? Yes, I know. Years ago I too had a very low opinion of this ancient branch of knowledge—until I was forcibly, shockingly disabused of my prejudice in this regard. It happened like this:
I was a very logical, rational Cartesian college professor, locked into the world of theory and abstraction like only an Eastern Ivy League intellectual can be, when, in November 1983, my world began to come unraveled. It began with the first of what I have come to call my “voice-over dreams.” No action, no figures, just a voice that said: “Friends will die. Relatives will die. You will give up everything and your life will be transformed.” I was married at the time and I woke up and told my husband, thinking that he must have heard this loud voice. But no, he had heard nothing. I then dismissed the whole experience, given my academic prejudices, but my husband remembered what I had told him. Five days later I learned that my friend Hazel Crafts had dropped dead. When I told Ed, he reminded me of the words I had heard. But I dismissed it as “just a coincidence.” Over the next six months, however, I lost another friend, two aunts and an uncle and everything in my life began to fall away. I came to feel like I was losing my toehold on reality and various friends tried to help, some sending me to ministers, others to counselors, others to psychiatrists and psychologists. So it was, in the Spring of 1984, that I thought my student Miranda was taking me to another therapist of some kind when I went with her to a home in downtown Bar Harbor. It was only on the sidewalk going into the house, just minutes before my appointment, that she told me the person I was about to meet was not a therapist but an astrologer. I recall freezing on the spot, turning to Miranda in shocked disbelief, and yelling at her that that sort of stuff was bunk, nonsense, that she should know better, that astrologers were full of—Well, you get the idea: I was not open to astrology at all! Miranda then said that if I didn’t go in she was still going to have to pay for the session and all the work the astrologer had done to prepare for it. That made me feel guilty: here was one of my students being willing to ante up her own limited funds to help me out. So I hung my head and went into the house. The session lasted the better part of 5 hours—5 hours during which I was transformed. First I sat there, arms folded across my chest in stern disbelief and disdain. Then I began to hear things that rang true—about my nature, my personality, and, even more intriguing, about what I was experiencing at the time. But it was when the astrologer began to tell me when all of it would be over, when life would get better, that I really sat up, took notice and then, lacking any other inner resources with which to explain what I had just experienced, I accused the woman of being a psychic. “No,” she replied, “anyone could do this, if he or she were prepared to study and learn how to interpret the symbols.” Astrology was just a powerful symbol system, open to anyone willing to invest the time and energy to learn. I could do just what she did. Presented with such an intellectual challenge, some part of me took the bait, and I became a student of Frances Sakoian on the spot. Over time, as I faced similar experiences, I came to realize that the Universe was taking each of my prejudices, each of my paradigms about how reality is, and “popping” them, forcing me to give up my old beliefs.
I recount my personal story here for those of you who, like me 30 years ago, have dismissed astrology without even examining it. A very powerful symbol system, developed in every one of the major cultures of the world, time-tested for thousands of years, astrology has validity. It should not be dismissed out of hand. And it can provide some insights into the questions that I am getting from students at The Jungian Center and readers of this blog. At the same time I realize some readers of this essay may be practicing astrologers, well versed in the technicalities of chart analysis and interpretation. As I try to write about America’s future through its chart, transits and progressions for both those who know nothing about charts and those at the opposite extreme, professional practitioners of astrology, I will add notes throughout the text for the pros interested in the specific astrological data on which I am basing my sense of our collective future. I suggest those familiar with astrology consult the appendix to this essay for more discussion of particular technical points.

America’s Natal Chart: Personality, Values and Collective Concerns

One of the tenets of astrological practice is that, before we look at transits and progressions (i.e. what is going on with the client at the time) we must look at the natal chart, to get a sense of who the client is, his/her interests, level of awareness and life purpose. So before we tackle the subject of what the current planetary configurations suggest about America’s future, we must examine America’s identity, as seen in its chart.
A natal chart is drawn for a date, place and time of birth. The debate begins: When could America be said to begin, as a country? Some insist the nation began only in 1787, with the Constitutional Convention that created the United States, others with George Washington’s inauguration as President on April 30, 1789. Most astrologers date our beginning to the signing in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, of the Declaration of Independence, on July 4th, 1776, the date when we formally broke our tie to Great Britain. But while this date and place are most commonly agreed upon in the astrological community, it is not without debate too: What time was the Declaration signed? No primary source gives us an exact time. Various astrologers have ventured times, some using the technique known as “rectification” to argue for a 4:45 PM time.
Why does this matter? Having an accurate time allows the astrologer to identify the “rising sign” and the house placements of the planets for that date and place. Absent a reliable birth time, we can create only a “solar chart,” which would lack some specifics that are useful in fleshing out a transit reading. In what follows, I am going to rely mostly on what is incontrovertible, assuming July 4th, 1776 is the “birthday” of America. I will indicate in footnotes those rare times when I am using data based on the hypothesized birth time.
America’s Personality. From its astrological chart, we can see many of the qualities that have made America great: its enterprising spirit, its ability to act with surety and confidence, its fertile imagination and ability to make practical use of creative inspiration. With strong engineering and mechanical skills, America is gifted with the ability to undertake ambitious projects, to coordinate large teams of people, to develop strategies and manage collective resources and power. Thanks to its Promethean Mercury, America’s mentality is future-oriented, inventive, ingenious and expansive in its goals. It is also very humanitarian, willing to help others, altruistic and generous of spirit. The Extraverted nature of America makes for a society that is gregarious and sociable, oriented more to outer reality rather than to its inner life.
Earlier essays noted some of the less desirable qualities in the American temperament. Analysis of America’s natal chart reveals others. For example, the negative side of America’s personality may go back to its origins as a nation of immigrants, leading to a certain feeling of inferiority or insecurity about status. To compensate for this feeling, America is inclined toward boasting and self-aggrandizement, reflecting a gnawing inner feeling of “not making the grade.” Its thinking influenced by deep-seated emotional patterns (of which it is unconscious), America feels the need to prove itself over and over, and it has an exaggerated sense of its own importance.
Most prominent, in America’s personality, is its puer nature. America is immature, childish in many ways, e.g. in its tendency to jump into things without proper preparation; its expectation of a big break coming any time now, producing a lack of realism; its tendency to scapegoat or need to have some external enemy on which to project its failings; its irrational gullibility; and its tendency to bite off more than it can chew. The puer also tends to be superficial, living on the surface, in an attempt to avoid facing the dark places within. Most problematic, with the puer nature, is its strong reluctance to face or deal with bad news, unpleasant facts or negative issues. Denial looms large in our collective makeup, and, as I noted in the essay on America’s shadow, denial is not that river in Egypt: it is a very dangerous trait in our collective life and one that could intensify our misery by blocking any realistic engagement with the challenges we currently face.
America’s Values. Jung made many trips to the United States and he liked this country, although he recognized its preoccupation with what he called the “yellow god,” i.e. gold/money. Material wealth and “success” defined in material terms are two of America’s most characteristic values. Others include progress (defined as continual improvement in physical conditions, particularly in terms of making life easier and more comfortable through the application of sophisticated technologies that save labor and time); freedom (defined as the untrammeled opportunity to do what one wants, when one wants, how one wants, with minimal interference or limitations); creativity (especially the pragmatic kind that solves practical problems and makes piles of money, e.g. blockbuster films, “killer aps” for the iPhone etc.); self-improvement (in the sense of the archetypal “Horatio Alger” self-made man); and platitudinous values like the flag (i.e. patriotism), Mom and apple pie.
More problematic values include its litigiousness, its vaunting of independence into exemptionalism (unwillingness to cooperate with other nations or to honor the decisions of courts outside the United States), its strong concern for self-protection, and its religiosity. This last is problematic because American religiosity is deeply imbued with cosmic vanity, that ideological stance that regards one’s own position as privileged. The cosmic vanity of America’s Christian fundamentalists is no different than the cosmic vanity of the Islamic jihadist. The anachronistic ideology of the medieval Crusaders lives on in the contemporary clash of these two groups.
America’s Collective Concerns. Modern critics of American culture identify our current concerns as “need, greed and speed.” We are addicted to faster, faster, more and more, never feeling like we have enough. As for “need,” American society seems unable to distinguish between “need” and “want.” Our “wants” are endless; our needs modest, but the materialism of our culture, coupled with the consumerism that is driven by the incessant marketing and advertising all around us, makes most Americans feel they need to buy this “new new thing” and that latest gadget. Perhaps once upon a time in our collective life we lived content with “Yankee frugality,” but that long ago was replaced with the discontent of “consumeritis,” the societal disease built on “planned obsolescence” and “keeping up with the Joneses.”
None of our consuming habits makes us feel more secure, and especially in these times of terrorism, security is another widespread collective concern. In an earlier blog essay I spoke of the true source of security—our individual knowledge, understanding and awareness of the Self within and its guidance. The vast majority of Americans knows nothing of this. Most Americans externalize their locus of security —savings, a pension, a job, a spouse, a set of marketable job skills—all of these vulnerable to loss. So fear haunts the collective mind of America.
Another concern is standing up for what we believe in. Americans have strong emotional convictions, and are willing to crusade for “truth, justice and the American way.” This is fine until it produces political paralysis, as we see now in Washington, with neither party willing to temper its ideology to make needed changes in important policies. It is also a detriment when “the American way” becomes the American Exceptionalism that was the subject of an earlier essay: chauvinistic, self-satisfied, terribly inflated—and therefore headed for a fall.
What is the nature of this “fall,” and when is it likely to happen? These questions shift us from America’s natal chart to an analysis of the aspects that the transiting planets are making. By “transiting” I am referring to the planets that are constantly moving through the heavens. The position of the 10 planets in 1776 is not the same as their position now, in 2010 (and especially around August 1st). The angles (“aspects” in astrological jargon) the planets’ current positions make now to the planets’ positions in 1776 provide us with insights into what might happen to the United States in the next few years. These transits also give us clues as to timing—when we might expect various events to occur.

America’s Future

After making some general remarks, I will consider our future under several headings: politics; economics, finance and ecology; and social or cultural circumstances.
General Overview
Generally, some expert astrologers recognize that the United States is likely to experience “severe lessons” because part of its destiny is to “gain realizations that are of a fundamental nature.” Given all the difficult aspects in the transits at this time, I can’t help but think many of the “severe lessons” are, or soon will be upon us.
Speaking of destiny calls to mind the issue of karma. Just as individuals get back what they put out so do countries. With all the aspects involving the Nodes of the Moon now, I can’t help but think the U.S.’s karma is now coming due. As I noted in an earlier blog essay “The Law of Cause and Effect and America’s Future,” the United States has terrible karma to clear. The coming months and years might be when this is meant to happen, given all the signs of it in the transits.
Hit by both transits and progressions the Nodal axis is timing a series of fated encounters that are meant to have a major impact on America’s growth and development. With transiting Nodal axis contacting Jupiter, this could relate to religion or our culture. Since the Islamic jihadists criticize both our religion and our culture, their actions might relate to this aspect. As the transiting Sun comes to conjunct natal Rahu and oppose natal Ketu in the coming months, the U.S. could experience some important, meaningful encounter linked to its destiny or purpose. Natal Jupiter and Venus are opposed by the transiting Nodal axis, suggesting this might involve a relationship or dispute with another country over religious differences. Again, the Islamic jihadists come to mind.
The challenge of confronting karma won’t go away soon: transiting Saturn is moving into a square of the Nodal axis which won’t become exact until the Fall of 2013. So it is likely we will be facing consequences of our collective past actions for years to come. We aren’t going to like this. It won’t be a pleasant experience. With all the transits and progressions involving Mars, and the 7 transits and 4 progressions involving Pluto, the next few years are going to see the eruption of primitive, infantile passions, the surfacing of deep rage and long-pent-up frustrations, and the triggering of public unrest. In such a climate of burning, instinctual drives, neither logic nor intuition will produce much in the way of answers. As a society we have to realize we are in a calcinatio time, an important stage of development that sets off complexes in the individual and is likely to show up in the collective in waves of mass demonstrations, protests and perhaps even rebellion. This is a “wipe out” time that wants to sweep away what has become anachronistic so new things can emerge. There will likely be changes in basic patterns of living, working, and governing. The progressions of Jupiter produce sublimatio energy now, providing us with opportunities to see what’s going on from a higher perspective.
The 4 transits of Saturn speak to a desire to break free of life structures that have become calcified and rigid. In an individual, these aspects often mark a time in life when there’s a major shift. On the collective level, this might show up as earthquakes, especially when the 9 transits involving Uranus are also considered. If so, the times in 2010 when an earthquake would be most likely are: March 22-29, April 18-25, May 15-23, June 12-19, July 9-14, August 5-13, September 2-9, September 29-October 6, November 22-30, and December 20-25th.
The afflictions involving Mercury suggest the coming year will not be very easy in terms of communications. Mercury under stress can time intervals when appointments are missed, problems arise in meetings, and errors in contracts create hassles. Computer systems and global communications systems may be disrupted or malfunction now. Information the United States gets might be incorrect, distorted or incomplete. (Are the bankers telling us the whole story? Are the generals on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan giving the President the full picture?). Some people may be reluctant to express their feelings honestly at this time, a dangerous situation if they are in positions of power or keepers of key information. In other contexts important communications may get garbled due to emotional issues or prejudices that block our getting or taking in all the facts. Given our long history of prejudice toward the Middle East, it is not hard to imagine that we would be prone to mis-hearing or misinterpreting the intelligence we get from that part of the world, and with the 9/11 trials coming up, there might be challenges and delays with Mercury afflicted. In 2010, miscommunications are especially likely from April 19 to May 12, August 21 to September 12 and December 11 to 30th, when transiting Mercury will be retrograde. Travel plans go awry, luggage gets lost, phones malfunction and both email and snail mail have glitches in these 3-week intervals.
Communications difficulties may be compounded given the unconscious stuff that is likely to emerge this year. In earlier essays I have noted how unconscious most Americans are. Jung reminds us that the overall level of any large collective is based not on the highest but on the lowest common denominator. This means our collective consciousness is very low. The transits of Neptune and Pluto making hard aspects to the Moon, Jupiter and Venus might show up in our collective life as distortions in our collective judgment, the surfacing of painful memories (e.g. the events of 9/11/01), and uncontrolled impulses being brought into the open. It will be particularly important in the next several years to have very cool, calm, collected leaders in positions of power.
Even if unconscious forces play a minor role (which I don’t think they will, given the karmic nature of our time), we are likely to see troublesome mental attitudes in our country. Impulsive, headstrong attitudes may arise as the transiting Sun comes to oppose Pluto. Self-deception—willful avoidance of facing reality—is likely with transiting Neptune inconjunct natal Neptune. Impractical ideas and intellectual conceit, as well as fixed attitudes and mental vacillation will pose problems to our effective hearing and handling of information. The next several years are likely to be a sustained interval of emotional and mental confusion.
All this will impact our relationships with other countries. We are likely to witness unforeseen difficulties in dealings with our friends, or with groups and organizations (like the United Nations and other non-governmental organizations). With progressed Mars in a square of the U.S. Sun, a relationship could break up. With transiting Pluto opposing Venus in the U.S. chart, changes in relationships are likely, perhaps due to the United States trying to reform or remake other nations. Conversely, we may see other nations or figures try to do this to the U.S. (I am reminded here of Osama bin Laden’s demands after 9/11 to the United States; clearly he and his ilk would like to remake us!).
Given the high level of indebtedness we now have with other countries, it is good that the stars at this time bespeak a growing interest in foreign cultures. Maybe we will even begin to support widespread foreign language learning in our elementary schools.
Such educational reform would require energy, perhaps more energy than our society will be able to summon, given the signs of laziness, self-indulgence, self-pity, confusion, anxiety and hopelessness indicated by an array of aspects. Arguments, anger and back-biting are also likely to continue; we see all these now in the polarized environment of the U.S. Congress. There are some “hot” issues that may surface that will grab the public’s attention; whether we will have sufficient sense to deal with these issues rationally is doubtful. We may lack the willingness, as a society, to cope with practical affairs. People may retreat to their homes and eschew involvement in public life. (Another, less palatable interpretation of these transits is that we might have to remain in our homes, quarantined in the face of pandemics, or insulated from biological or radiological threats).
Eccentric or unreliable people might be in key positions (like the fellow in the consular office of the embassy in Yemen who misspelled Abdulmutallab’s name, thus leaving him off the “No Fly” list), and they could create problems for the U.S. We will need leaders who resist the tendency (due to the U.S.’s “J” nature) to jump to conclusions without sufficient information. Calm deliberation will be the order of the day, but is likely to be in short supply. We will need a balanced, rational outlook in the years ahead, an outlook using caution, diplomacy and good judgment. We will need to cooperate with other countries and play fair, and work to find honest solutions to problems. We also need to recognize that there are large-scale forces afoot that affect all of humanity, and this is no time for idleness, hopelessness or unconsciousness. With transiting Pluto squaring Neptune, we as a society must recognize, understand and work with the unconscious, but given the infantile nature of the American psyche, I think it is unlikely we will do so.
More likely is that the U.S. will be its own worst enemy in the years ahead, stumbling into political, economic, ecological, and social changes beyond its control. Life will feel like a big test. Old wounds may reappear, bringing up social discontent and sparking a death-and-rebirth time. The hardships and frustrations we are likely to see are meant to encourage conscious change, serious reforms to make a world that works for everyone. No longer will we be able to carry on with old ways, old forms, old beliefs, old attitudes.
Aspects of Our Political Future
We are already seeing the stars reflected in some aspects of our political life, e.g. the polarization and battles between Republicans and Democrats, with few politicians taking the high road of statesmanship or thinking of the long-term well-being of the country. Such in-fighting and political posturing is alienating the electorate and sparking protests, as we see in movements like the rise of the Tea Party. Conflicts with government authorities, and more broadly, conflicts with authority figures of all types, are likely to continue and probably will get worse. Power struggles are going to be a theme beyond government: we will see them in the world of business, as well as in the military. But we aren’t likely to see the full picture, because another theme of the politics of the years ahead is secrecy. Secret or covert action could be carried on behind the scenes, some of it to avoid opposition or disapproval from the public or Congress. Even now, of course, we surely know we are not privy to all the “black ops” and other forms of covert activity that are going on ostensibly for the good of the country.
More problematic than secrecy will be the theme of domination: the United States may try to dominate other countries (nothing new there, of course) or it may get a taste of this treatment from others, with the double Sun-Pluto/Pluto-Sun opposition. Power struggles are likely to take place on both the domestic and the international scenes. The latter will spark problems in our foreign relations (we see intimations of this already in our dealings with Pakistan). If the U.S. tries to reform or remake other countries without cleaning up its own house (and huge debt level) there could be a backlash or dangers. The progressed Chiron return could produce crises that are beyond America’s control. Things could get out of hand, particularly with the transits involving Mars, suggesting impulsive and aggressive behavior, war, revolution or natural disaster.
The transits suggest that the mood of the American public will be out of harmony with our political leadership. The people may have little sympathy for government officials, particularly if public scandals come to light, or if grandiose, unrealistic projects have little to show for all the money and rhetoric they sparked. Lawsuits, rash physical confrontations, possibly even large-scale rebellion may mark the coming years. Certainly it will be a challenging time for politicians, as more and more citizens begin to ask pointed questions, reflecting their growing discontent and feelings of disillusionment.
The United States experiences a Saturn return in October 2011. Such transits are always challenging times, marking intervals of crises and calling for a fundamental reorientation. Next year will be a time of breakdown and disintegration (will the States stay united? Will the country split apart?). If the union holds, the country is likely to experience a fragile self-confidence, which may be very hard to endure, given its triumphalism and vaunting sense of exceptionalism.
The next few years politically will be a time for the U.S. to develop practicality and face reality. We are no longer the masters of our own house, given that we are so deeply in debt to other nations. We can no longer dictate to others, given how dependent we are on foreign resources (especially oil). We have to give up our intellectual and moral conceit and recognize that uncontrolled selfish impulses will be our undoing. We are facing a breakdown time, a time when, if we choose, we can turn breakdown into breakthrough. We only have a few years to make this shift in attitude: transiting Pluto will come to oppose the U.S. Sun exactly early in 2016. This is when the stars suggest we will have to make some great sacrifice, especially around power. We may have to submit at that time to another nation more powerful than we (China perhaps?). We will undergo a change of a total, irrevocable nature. Since Pluto transits are so powerful, and Pluto moves so slowly, astrologers often give its transits a wide orb: we might be feeling the intimations of this challenging transit even now.
Aspects of Our Economic and Ecological Future
Without a doubt we have been seeing intimations of the future in our economic conditions these last two years. We can expect more of the same hardship and problems related to corporate finances, insurances, taxes and public monies in the years ahead, along with lawsuits and legal difficulties, wasteful spending, and neglect of necessary maintenance of our local and national infrastructure. While we will hear of more and more Americans losing their jobs, the media will also present us with news of obscene levels of luxurious living and selfishness on the part of moguls and CEOs whose greed knows no bounds. In the face of such a disconnect between the people and the plutocrats, discontent may boil up into riots, looting and widespread thievery.
The last two years have presented us with the scenario for the future in terms of our nation’s finances. All the talk of things getting better have been the result of the temporary conjunction of Jupiter and Neptune. Jupiter is now moving off Neptune, and it is likely that by mid-summer 2010, when Jupiter will be conjunct Uranus, the rose-colored glasses will be off and people will return to reality. Aspect after aspect warns of conflicts and problems related to corporate finances, taxes, insurance, and monies we have borrowed from others. Past financial extravagance will cause the U.S. embarrassment, and we may see difficulties in dealings with our creditors. It is well known that both Russia and China would like to see a single global currency. It may well be that the coming years see such pressure on the U.S. dollar that these two countries get their wish, as some of the aspects refer to coercion in financial affairs and a “sustained interval of financial tension.” The progressed Chiron return may spark a severe depression as the stock market goes into a swoon much more severe than what we saw in recent years. This is a time for both personal and national belt-tightening, but all we hear out of Washington are calls for more programs, costing more money. In this, as in so many other areas of reality, the U.S. is in denial. The slowdown we are now experiencing will turn into a major depression likely to last for years—all meant to induce us, as a society, to develop new values, new attitudes toward the material world and money, and to work toward a new economic paradigm, predicated on justice and equity for all.
The business world faces many uncertainties now and this will continue in the years ahead. We can expect the unexpected in our collective commercial life. Caution will be needed, as well as a good deal of courage on the part of entrepreneurs hoping to do well in the business landscape of the next few years. We are likely going to hear about more deceptive and unethical business practices, and yet more examples of greed and selfishness that create legal and PR difficulties, as well as financial losses. There are likely to be problems with work efficiency and hassles in business caused by communications glitches. Perhaps this will be due to the sunspot activity that scientists predict for 2011 or it may take the form of computer hackers spreading viruses or developing ways to break into and take over control of servers and other large computer-based communications systems. The coming years will not be an easy time for PR and marketing firms, or businesses involved in transportation, import/export or finance.
We are likely to see more food-borne illnesses, workplace dangers from chemicals, explosives, fires or employees so enraged by mistreatment that they go on shooting rampages at their workplace (or former workplace). The emotional and psychological problems of workers kept on after massive layoffs will also be an issue facing many businesses. Occupational hazards from toxic chemicals, water pollution, or leaking gases will also be in the news. We may see tainted medications, as quality standards fall due to greedy suppliers of raw materials. (This is something we have seen already with the Chinese who substituted cheaper substances for more costly gylcerine). Tainted meds will be a serious problem as more people fall sick: Since economic and financial stresses tend to weaken immune systems, more people are likely to fall prey to infections. The H1N1 swine flu epidemic is not going to be the last widespread disease in our collective future.
The environment will continue to generate debate, even as the reality of global warming becomes more and more evident. From mining to melting glaciers, we will witness myriad examples of Mother Nature trying to get our attention, while we still have time to turn the global environmental crisis around. Given the scope and severity of our economic and financial dilemmas, I would be very pleasantly surprised if the environment gets the attention it deserves.
Our Social and Cultural Situation in the Years Ahead
Given the puer nature of the American national soul, we are likely to see more people spending more time indulging in social activities that divert their attention from the challenges we will be facing as a society. The puer does not like to face negativity or deal with the “hard stuff” of life: he would rather play. Juvenal recognized this in his famous remark about how the Imperial subverters of the old Republic were able to co-opt the people with “panem et circenses,” bread and circuses. The modern form of bread is Social Security, disability and unemployment payments, food stamps and WIC, while the modern version of circuses is sports: NASCAR, the Super Bowl, the World Series etc. While the social structures of our culture fall apart, the American people are likely to pull an ostrich act and go hide their heads in their TVs, Wiis, iPods and iPads. Those still willing to engage socially with others may encounter problems—insincere gestures made to avoid unpleasantness, self-centered attitudes that alienate others, profound restlessness, impulsive actions, over-use of alcohol or abuse of drugs. Escapism will not be appropriate in the years ahead, although many, if not most Americans, are likely to fall into it. The future will call for Americans to become responsible for themselves and not look to government—local, state or national—to bail them out.
On the cultural scene, we are likely to see difficult problems arise over religious beliefs. With transiting Pluto opposing Jupiter, the United States may become the victim of autocratic promotion of religious beliefs (think al Qaeda). We might experience coercion in the name of religion. The transits and progressions of Pluto to America’s chart call for the death of old cosmologies and religions so as to allow the rise of new visions and spiritualities more attuned to the coming Age of Aquarius. Transiting Neptune coming to conjunct the Moon fosters attunement to spiritual energies as it wipes out the old ways. We are likely to see more people become involved in personal expressions of the spiritual impulse within. Multiple transits and progressions support the predictions of Native peoples that the coming years will see a global spiritual awakening.
Such a global movement will likely be supported by a growing interest in the cultural traditions of foreign countries and a willingness on the part of Americans to travel to foreign lands to experience these traditions first-hand. This is nothing new: Americans have had a wanderlust for many generations. But foreign travel for Americans in the future may come with family separations, lack of prudent discrimination, poor taste and dangers from mobs or crowds. If the U.S. government continues to be tone-deaf to the mood of the American people, we may even see mob violence and riots in this country.
The aspects involving Saturn and Pluto to the U.S. chart are asking us to work with our collective shadow (beginning, of course, with our own individual shadows). We must, as a culture, face our shadow. It is staring us in the face: Its name is “Taliban.” The events of the last decade have served to “constellate” our collective shadow and now we must face it—not lambaste it, not excoriate it, not point the finger and call it an “axis of evil.” All that is just more projection. We must give up all the exceptionalist rhetoric and face the truth that we, as a nation, are not perfect, not superior to other countries, not above needing to work on ourselves. We are now in an important time in the history of our national life, a time meant to spark emotional and spiritual development. We need to give up our materialism, greed, selfishness, consumeritis and self-indulgence, and come to recognize the potentials that lie in our immediate future.

The Potentials in Our Future

So far this essay has had a negative tone. We are living in challenging times and such times often seem negative. But we must recognize that we are choosing to put labels like “negative” on what is not necessarily negative at all. It seems to be part of basic human nature that we get motivated to change more from what is unpleasant, what is not working, than when everything is going well. We are now in a time—and facing a much more difficult couple of decades—when things will not go smoothly, when our karmic “chickens” come home to roost, when we will have to grow up, as a society. It will be much easier to do so if we change our attitude, and focus on the positives—the purposes and intentions of all the challenges we face.
Why all the disruptions, depressions, discontent? We are meant to wake up now, to use our collective painful experiences as awakeners, as goads to our creative imagination, to stimulate our ingenuity and resourcefulness. When we confront an old way that no longer works, it is meant to help us discover some new way that is more aligned with what really matters in life. For example, when budgets are tight and high-tech gifts are beyond the family’s means, parents and children might turn to the simpler pleasures of storytelling, board games and other forms of entertainment that foster literacy, inter-generational interaction and family solidarity. Economic hard times can be the incentive for us to create a new economic model (capitalism being so destructive to both the Earth and human beings), with new values and a new attitude toward money and the material world. As the most materialistic of all cultures (as well as the most wasteful and consumptive), the United States has to move away from materialism and come to believe the truth in the bumper sticker: “The best things in life aren’t things.”
The events in our national life are providing us with myriad opportunities to move in new directions and create the solidarity that “rugged individualism” has thwarted in our collective history. For example, if petroleum becomes a resource in very limited supply (a likely prospect over the next decade) it will give us the opportunity to develop car pools or local shared transportation systems, and thus to get to know and rely much more on our neighbors. If the national government disappears (another likely prospect in the next several decades), we have the opportunity to develop regional associations and a strong system of local communities. If we are forced to evacuate our homes and move to other places (either through natural disasters, like earthquakes, or through terrorism), we have the opportunity to jettison most of our “stuff” and come to recognize what’s really important in life. These are unsettled times—just the sort of times that inspire creative artists—so we can expect an outpouring of insightful creative expression in the coming years, by both plastic and performing artists. We need to be open to such creativity and celebrate the changes it can help bring about.
We are standing at the precipice of a breakthrough time in our national life. As always, it comes with a breakdown period beforehand. We must remember the point: that old ways, old systems, old verities, things we have taken for granted are leaving so that we can move in new directions and create a more viable reality, a reality attuned to the demands of our souls and the wisdom of Nature. We can do this, we can get through this challenging interval, but only if we understand the bigger picture—that what we are facing is purposive, meaningful, important and ultimately for our benefit.

Appendix for Those Familiar with Astrology
(and others who want further information)

The material above was drawn only from what is incontrovertible in the U.S. chart and its near-term transits. Nothing was drawn from the debatable components—house systems, Western vs. Vedic, Tropical vs. Sidereal, possible birth times. In what follows I consider information from some of the debatable sources.
First, I want to note that I am using a 10 degree orb here—an orb much wider than the 6 degree orb I use when handling individual charts. Then I suggest the experienced astrologer turn to the chart included with this essay which presents the version I think best represents the United States in terms of rising sign, house placements and choice of system. What criteria did I use to make these choices? Let’s consider this question.
My choice of rising sign comes from Liz Greene’s The Outer Planets and Their Cycles. Greene was not original here: she got her chart from Dane Rudhyar’s The Astrology of America’s Destiny. A footnote in Greene’s book noted the work of Barry Lynes, who “rectified” America’s chart by culling through 200 years of its history, to determine a more accurate time for the “birth” of the country as 4:45PM, rather than Rudhyar’s 5PM. Using 4:45PM gives us an Ascendant of 7 degrees Sagittarius in the Tropical system.
Why the Tropical system? Those who have had chart readings with me know that I prefer the Sidereal system. In this case, however, I think the Tropical more accurately reflects the low level of consciousness, the manifold puer qualities and the ESTJ nature of the American temperament. As Liz Greene notes, Sagittarius as a rising sign suits the United States so well, with its lust for freedom, dislike of constraints or limits, its love of wealth, its wanderlust and pioneering spirit and its cowboy (puer) mentality. The Sidereal system would put the ASC in Scorpio, and that does not suit the American nature at all. Saturn in Libra in the 10th house in the Tropical system also well reflects the American tendency to “set itself up as the arbiter of rights, the fair judge and leader and guide.” —a role it loves to play in the world, a very different role than one would expect with the Sidereal Saturn in Virgo.
While I can see the Sun in Gemini in the Sidereal system (more puer), I can also see the Cancerian nature of the Tropical Sun, with its strong protective and defensive instincts, its concern for material security, its fear of ridicule, its isolationism, its risk-taking with other peoples’ money, its strong patriotism (think “American exceptionalism”), its dislike of mental or physical discomfort, its powerful imagination and its aversion to being told how to do things.
As for the house system—Placidus (Western) or Vedic—I went with the Placidus because it posits Venus, Mars and Jupiter in the 7th house, a placement that I think reflects the projective tendencies of America much better than the 8th house placement these planets have in the Vedic system. In both systems the Sun is in the 8th house, so the basic nature of the country—focused on corporate and business finance, other peoples’ money, progress, regeneration, secrecy and superficiality (in its reluctance to face the dark places in the national psyche)—is the same regardless of which house system is used.
Now I want to turn to a more general examination of the U.S. chart (Tropical, Placidus, Sagittarius rising) and the transits that are underway now or will be coming up in the next 15-18 months. See the chart included in this blog essay. The astonishing number of Grand Crosses is immediately evident: 14 involve planets in the 1st, 4th/I.C., 7th and 10th/M.C. houses, the 4 most significant houses in a chart. However these multiple hard aspects manifest, the United States surely will have to sit up and take notice.
Another two, more transient crosses develop a few days later, as transiting Mercury comes to oppose the U.S. Moon in square to the Ascendant/Descendant, and to ASC opposing natal Uranus. These crosses are in the 9th, 3rd, 12th/ASC, and 6th/7th/DSC houses. Communications will surely be an issue, perhaps communications fraught with intense emotionality, frustration or anger (since the Moon is involved and afflicted). We are also likely to witness finger-pointing and blaming, as the “powers that be” project out their stuff, and, as a nation, the U.S. tries to weasel out of its dilemma by looking to others (7th house). That the 12th house is involved suggests that the coming crisis/crises will have, as one of its purposes, to make the United States more conscious of its unconscious. Whether the nation will be willing to look within remains questionable. I have my doubts, given its immature puer nature.
Note also the transiting Sun hitting Rahu in the 8th, a position that lies on the midpoint between the natal Mars-Neptune square. This seems likely to highlight 8th house issues, e.g. corporate finances and monies the United States derives from other countries. As I noted earlier, with the involvement of Rahu, I find myself thinking of karma coming due around our profligate ways and materialistic values.
Another Grand Cross will form as Venus and Mars transit through the 10th and into the 11th house and come to oppose U.S Chiron while squaring the natal Mercury-Pluto opposition. Chiron is the wounded healer, a sensitive spot in any chart, and hit here by hard aspects, I can imagine that the U.S. will feel some sort of pain in this time. All the 10th house activity suggests that whatever comes down will not be hidden: the 10th is not a house where things get hidden and so the United States’ crisis, karmic moment, financial humiliation or global comeuppance will be out there for all to see. Whether this will provoke some sensible response on the part of Americans, whether all these cosmic energies will be put to some positive purpose, the astrologer can never predict: “The stars only impel, they do not compel.”

Bibliography

Bacevich, Andrew (2008), The Limits of Power. New York: Henry Holt & Co.
Cole, Helene (2010), “Astrological Insights,” Astrological Insights Archive: The US and Canada: Sister Nations. URL: spiritlink.com/insights-US-Canada.html
Deloria, Vine (1988), Custer Died for Your Sins. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
Edinger, Edward (1995), Melville’s Moby Dick: An American Nekyia. Toronto: Inner City Press.
Farmer, John (2009), The Ground Truth. New York: Riverhead Books.
Friedman, Thomas (2010), “Never Heard That Before,” The New York Times (January 31, 2010), WK 10.
Greene, Liz (1983), The Outer Planets & Their Cycles: The Astrology of the Collective. Reno NV: CRCS Publications.
Howell, Craig Robert (2010), The Astrology of the United States. URL: www.mykwanyin.com/usastro.html
Jung, Carl (1966), “Two Essays on Analytical Psychology,” CW 7. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1970), “Civilization in Transition,” CW 10. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1973), Letters, ed. Gerhard Adler & Aniela Jaffé. 2 vols. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Juvenal (1958), The Satires of Juvenal, trans Rolfe Humphries. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Mails, Thomas E. (1997), The Hopi Survival Kit. New York: Penguin Compass.
Mander, Jerry (1991), In the Absence of the Sacred: The Failure of Technology & the Survival of the Indian Nations. San Francisco: The Sierra Club.
Mipham, Sakyong (2003), Turning the Mind Into an Ally. New York: Riverhead Books.
Nichols, Roger (2003), American Indians in U.S. History. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
Pehrson, John & Susan Mehrtens (1997), Intuitive Imagery: A Resource at Work. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Prophet, Elizabeth Clare (1991), The Astrology of the Four Horsemen. Gardiner MT: Summit University Press.
Rich, Frank (2010), “The State of the Union Is Comatose,” The New York Times (January 31, 2010), WK 10.
Sakoian, Frances & Louis Acker (1972), That Inconjunct-Quincunx: The Not So Minor Aspect. Lakemont GA: Copple House Books Inc.
________ (1973), The Astrologer’s Handbook. New York: Harper & Row.
________ (1976), The Astrology of Human Relationships. New York: Harper & Row.
________ (1977), Predictive Astrology. New York: Harper & Row.
________ (1978), Those Inconjunct Quincunx Transits (no further bibliographic data given)
________ & Betty Caulfield (1980), Astrological Patterns: The Key to Self-Discovery. New York: Harper & Row.
Smale, Alison (2010), “Leaders in Davos Admit Drop in Trust and Uncertainty Ahead,” The New York Times (January 31, 2010), 6.
Solté, David (1994), Scorpionic America. San Diego: David Solté.
Stevenson, Richard (2010), “The Muddled Selling of the President,” The New York Times (January 31, 2010), WK1,4.
Vogel, Virgil (1972), This Country Was Ours. New York: Harper & Row.
Volcker, Paul (2010), “How to Reform Our Financial System,” The New York Times (January 31, 2010), WK 11.
Waldman, Carl (2000), Atlas of the North American Indian, rev. ed. New York: Checkmark Books.
Washburn, Wilcomb (1975), The Assault on Indian Tribalism: The General Allotment Law (Dawes Act) of 1887. New York: J.B. Lippincott.
Waters, Frank, Book of the Hopi. New York: Penguin, 1963.
Woodward, Harry & Steve Buchholz (1987), After-Shock: Helping People Through Corporate Change. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

]]> smehrtens smehrtens@potlatchgroup.com http://jungiancenter.org/blog/blog_comment.asp?bi=45 2010-04-01T08:36:06-05:00 2010-04-01T08:36:06-05:00 2010-04-01T08:36:06-05:00
In the previous essay I noted how Jung anticipated a new development in the evolution of religion. Some of his followers call this the “new dispensation.” Just what this means, and the role the individual will play in it, is the subject of this essay.
We must begin with some definitions, since “dispensation” is not a household word for most readers of this blog. Nor would Jung’s definitions of “God” be familiar to most readers. After defining terms, we will consider the role of the individual in the emerging spiritual landscape, and we’ll conclude by setting the subject in the broader context of the evolution of Western civilization.

Some Definitions
Dispensation
“Dispensation” comes from the Latin verb dispensare, “to manage, distribute, allot, arrange, dispense.” Given our materialistic ethos most Americans would immediately think of the dispensing of resources, stuff, food or money. But our focus here is more on intangibles. What intangible is being dispensed? Jungians would say the stuff of the psyche. “Dispensation” defined in psychic terms is “the specific arrangement or system by which our perception of the world is ordered.”
This system is not something a group of people decide to create: It is the work of the objective psyche or Collective Unconscious, and it evolves over time. Thousands of years ago the psyches of the ancestors of Western people operated within a participation mystique with Nature. In time, this changed, as the ancient Hebrews took up monotheism, and their perception became ordered around the worship of Jahweh, the God of the Torah. The fact that we now speak of an “Old Testament” and a New bespeaks the later evolution of another form of ordering, what Jung’s followers call the “Christian dispensation,” centered around the life and teachings of Jesus Christ.
Jung felt that the key difference between the Judaic and Christian religions was the “transformation of the God-image” that occurred over hundreds of years from the time of Job (c. 600-400 B.C.) to the time of Christ. As he anticipated the shift from the Age of the Fishes (Pisces) to the Age of the Water-Bearer (Aquarius), Jung recognized the outlines of a new form of religious expression.
Jung’s follower, analyst Lawrence Jaffe, coined a term for this new form: the “psychological dispensation.” The first dispensation was the Judaic, the second, the Christian. What Jaffe and other Jungians now see is the emergence of a new religion of consciousness, a “religion of experience” that will reconcile the first and second dispensations.
This “psychological dispensation” is a form of religious expression in which
experience supplants faith: Jung articulated this key feature of the new dispensation in the interview he had with John Freeman of the BBC late in his life. Freeman asked Jung if he believed in God. Jung paused and then said, “… I know. I don’t need to believe, I know.” This was not the only time Jung spoke about his knowing the Divine. In an earlier interview Jung said “I only believe in what I know. And that eliminates believing. Therefore I do not take his existence on belief—I know that he exists.”
In the psychological dispensation, the role of the individual becomes central, as Jungian analyst Edward Edinger noted, when he said that by becoming “…aware of the transpersonal center of the psyche, the Self,” and by living “… out of that awareness, [the individual] can be said to be the incarnation of the God-image.” This quote begs further definition. What is meant by “God”? by “God-image”? by “Self”?
Jung’s Definitions of God
Since “God” is a word most Western people have heard often, the reader of this blog essay is likely to assume he/she knows what Jung meant. Not so! First, note the plural in the sub-heading: Jung used many terms to define the Divine in his voluminous writings.
Second, ever the empiricist, Jung was not about to indulge in vagueness with his terms. He recognized that “god,” as a concept, is unknowable, “because no one can get outside his/her own psyche.” Jung reminds us that “… everything men assert about God is twaddle, for no man can know God.” Jung makes a distinction, therefore, between “God,” the unknowable, and the “God-image,” that sense or image we have in our minds. Jung said: “… I speak of the God-image and not of God because it is quite beyond me to say anything about God at all.” And Jung was quite critical of theologians who did claim to speak of God and describe God, without making any distinction between the unknowable and the mental image.
Third, Jung’s “God” was not absolute, but “relative to man.” Regarding the Divine as absolute would place God “outside all connection to mankind.” Jung recognized that “Such a God would be of no consequence at all.” And God was of great consequence in Jung’s psychology, as seen in the 498+ citations listed in the Index to his Collected Works alone (not considering his Letters, or the other books, essays and articles he wrote).
Jung spoke much of God, but his uses of the term vary greatly. Here are some statements likely to resonate:
“God is Reality itself.”
God is “… a factor unknown in itself.”
God is “… an inner experience, not discussable as such but impressive.”
“God is a universal experience which is obfuscated only by silly rationalism and an equally silly theology.”
“… God is ev to pan.” (in all things)
“God is an immediate experience of a very primordial nature, one of the most natural products of our mental life,…”
“… I do know of a power of a very personal nature and an irresistible influence. I call it ‘God’.”
“I only know Him as a personal, subjective experience…”
God is “… the principle of order…”
“… God is a mystery, and everything we say about Him is said and believed by human beings… when I speak of God I always mean the image man has made of him…”
But consider these quotes from Jung that might either shock or puzzle the typical Western person:
God is “… an apt name given to all overpowering emotions in my own psychic system, subduing my conscious will and usurping control over myself. This is the name by which I designate all things which cross my willful path violently and recklessly, all things which upset my subjective views, plans and intentions and change the course of my life for better or worse.”
God is “… the power of fate in … positive as well as negative aspect,…”
“After thinking this over I have come to the conclusion that being ‘made in the likeness’ applies not only to man but also to the Creator: he resembles man or is his likeness, which is to say that he is just as unconscious as man or even more unconscious,…”
“… it would be an arbitrary limitation of the concept of God to assume that He is only good and so deprive evil of real being. If God is only good, everything is good….”
“… I know of the existence of God-images in general and in particular. I know it is a matter of a universal experience and … I know that I have such experience also, which I call God. It is the experience of my will over against another and very often stronger will, crossing my path often with seemingly disastrous results, putting strange ideas into my head and maneuvering my fate… outside my knowledge and intention…”
And Jung recognized just how strange some of the above might sound to the typical Western person, when he wrote: “… it is strange and painful to us to admit a paradoxical or a contradictory God-image.” We are not used to defining the Divine as a force that upsets our life, that “maneuvers our fate” or that includes evil. Even more surprising is Jung’s idea that God might be even more unconscious than humans. Which brings us to the third type of definition Jung used for “God:”
psychological usages:
“My God-image corresponds to an autonomous archetypal pattern. Therefore I can experience God as if he were an object, but I need not assume that it is the only image.”
“’God’ therefore is in the first place a mental image equipped with instinctual ‘numinosity,’ i.e. an emotional value bestowing the characteristic autonomy of the affect on the image.”
“For me ‘God’ is on the one hand a mystery that cannot be unveiled, and to which I must attribute only one quality: that it exists in the form of a particular psychic event which I feel to be numinous and cannot trace back to any sufficient cause lying within my field of experience. On the other hand ‘God’ is a verbal image, a predicate or mythologem founded on archetypal premises which underlie the structure of the psyche as images of the instincts (‘instinctual patterns’)… these images possess a certain autonomy which enables them to break through, sometimes against the rational expectations of consciousness (thus accounting in part for their numinosity). ‘God’ in this sense is a biological, instinctual and elemental ‘model,’… which, despite its numinosity, is and must be exposed to intellectual and moral criticism…”
“… ‘God’ within the frame of psychology is an autonomous complex, a dynamic image, and that is all psychology is ever able to state. It cannot know more about God.”
On a personal level, Jung used another term for God: the Self. This is a major term in the new dispensation and must be defined.
Definitions of the Self
“… the self is a redoubtable reality….”
the Self is “… an empirical concept [that] designates the whole range of psychic phenomena in man… it encompasses both the experienceable and the inexperienceable (or the not yet experienced)…”
the Self is “… a transcendental concept…[that] thus characterizes an entity that can be described only in part.”
“The self is not only the center, but also the whole circumference which embraces both conscious and unconscious; it is the center of this totality,…”
“I call this unknowable the ‘self’…”
“The self is … a borderline concept, not by any means filled out with the known psychic processes.”
The Self is the “archetype of wholeness and the regulating center of the psyche;… a transpersonal power that transcends the ego.”
The Self “… might equally be called the ‘God within us’.”
As that form of the Divine that lives within each of us, the Self was a key component of Jung’s thought and is a key feature of the emerging “psychological dispensation.” It reflects Jung’s stress on the individual, as the sole carrier of consciousness. Where Yahweh was the focus of the first, Judaic, dispensation, and Jesus was the focus of the second, Christian, version, the individual person will be the focus of the third dispensation. To the role of the individual we now turn.

The Role of the Individual in the New Dispensation

In several previous essays I noted how Jung had no use for mass movements or “mass man.” He disliked large groups and felt no lasting change ever occurred in collectives. In Answer to Job, the book in which Jung developed most clearly his sense of the future form of religion, he noted
There is only one remedy for the leveling effect of all collective measures, and that is to emphasize and increase the value of the individual. A fundamental change of attitude (metanoia) is required, a real recognition of the whole man. This can only be the business of the individual and it must begin with the individual in order to be real.
In one of his last books, The Undiscovered Self, written for laymen, Jung pleaded with people to recognize the vital role each of us is meant to play now, in these critical times:
So much is at stake and so much depends on the psychological constitution of modern man… does the individual know that he is the makeweight that tips the scales?
As the “sole and natural carrier of life,” the individual—not groups, organizations, congregations, clergy or a priestly class—bears the full weight of responsibility in the new dispensation. This means we must look within, not without. We must value our inner guidance, our intuition, and cherish our imagination and creativity, two human qualities so expressive of our divine nature. We must also do our inner work, to get in touch with and integrate our shadow side, our contrasexual side (animus or anima), to hold the tension of opposites that confront us all through life.
The new dispensation recognizes that individual people “are to become incarnating vessels of the Holy Spirit on an ongoing basis.” The role Jesus played in the second dispensation, individuals are to take up in the third. When Jesus spoke of the “living water” that he could give to people he was looking ahead to the coming eon when each of us will be the “bearer” or container of that “living water” that symbolizes the Holy Spirit. “Water bearer” is the symbol for the zodiacal sign of Aquarius. The individual is at the center of the metanoia that is now underway, as we move slowly out of the Age of Pisces into the Age of Aquarius.

The New Dispensation in the Evolution of Western Civilization

“Slowly” is not used loosely here: world eons change over many centuries. Jung looked back in Western history and identified a 12th century monk, Joachim of Flora, as one of the first Western writers to spot the change which was just beginning. Joachim wrote of the 3 “ages” of Western history: the “Age of the Father,” the term he used for the first, Judaic, dispensation; the “Age of the Son,” his term for the Christian dispensation, centered around Jesus Christ as the Son of God; and he foresaw an “Age of the Holy Spirit,” when divinity would no longer be lodged “out there,” in some figure outside human beings.
Jung recognized the instability that characterized the 12th century, with its numerous heresies. Joachim’s ideas were anathematized by the Church, which, then as now, had no use for individual people claiming they could know or “be a carrier” of God. How could such people be controlled or kept under the thumb of church leaders, if they felt they could have direct and personal knowledge of the Divine?
Jung wants us to understand that the first two dispensations are loosing their “juice,” their vibrancy, their hold on the Western consciousness. Goethe saw this. Nietzsche recognized it, and tried to sound the alarm in his famous statement that “God is dead.” The God of the earlier dispensations—that version of the Divine that is “out there,” external to human beings, accessible only through the mediation of some religious hierarchy—is changing, as Western consciousness evolves.
Jung’s followers believe that the form of spiritual expression consistent with the evolution of Western consciousness will partner the individual person with God, with individuals becoming friends of God —a God recognized in all its completeness (containing both good and evil). Gripped by the numen in encounters with the Self, the individual will recognize what Jesus meant when he spoke of the “treasure buried in the field.” In the new dispensation, consciousness will be the new value and goal. And the purpose of living will be to create more and more consciousness.
Creating more consciousness is not easy. People will have to expend “arduous, conscious effort” to do it. Doing so will force confrontation with the deus absconditus, the hidden god, the shadow side of the Divine. The God-image mentioned above will need to widen, to include the breadth of Jung’s many definitions listed earlier. For some people reluctant to look on the dark side or to go into their depths, this new dispensation will be most unpalatable.
But Jung and his followers see many benefits. For the individual these include, a tremendous expansion of compassion, empathy and creativity (born from recognizing one’s shadow, redeeming one’s suffering, and touching into the ultimate creative impulse), as well as an unshakeable sense of security (through constant awareness of the Self and its guidance).
For the collective, widespread adherence to the new dispensation promises the redemption of matter (for people will recognize that all of physical reality is pervaded with the Divine); the spontaneous formation of communities of like-minded people (something we are seeing even now, in the growth and popularity of organizations like the Jungian Center); the healing of societal malaise (as more people find the true source of meaning and healing); and the evolution of the Collective Unconscious into a more ethical and creative psychological force.
Jung pointed out the vital necessity for a new religious myth that would undergird Western culture. He recognized that we are living in a time that has lost its central myth, which Edward Edinger called “a truly apocalyptic condition.” Our civilization has become rudderless, without the means to steer Western societies in meaningful ways, without solid bases for decision-making. In earlier essays we discussed the archetype of the apocalypse and how current global conditions are leading us closer and closer to confronting our collective shadow. The emergence of the “psychological dispensation” is one positive sign on the horizon that could avert global disaster. But for it to do so requires individuals to find that “treasure in the field”—the treasure that lies within each of us.

Bibliography

Edinger, Edward (1996), The Aion Lectures: Exploring the Self in C.G. Jung’s Aion. Toronto: Inner City Press.
________ (1984), The Creation of Consciousness: Jung’s Myth for Modern Man. Toronto: Inner City Press.
Elder, George & Dianne Cordic (2009), An American Jungian: In Honor of Edward F. Edinger. Toronto: Inner City Press.
Jaffe, Lawrence (1999), Celebrating Soul: Preparing for the New Religion. Toronto: Inner City Press.
________ (1990), Liberating the Heart: Spirituality and Jungian Psychology. Toronto: Inner City Press.
Jung, Carl (1956) “Symbols of Transformation,” Collected Works, 5, 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1971), “Psychological Types,” Collected Works, 6. Princeton: Princeton University Press
________ (1966), “Two Essays on Analytical Psychology,” CW 7. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1959), “Aion,” Collected Works, 9ii. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1970), “Civilization in Transition,” CW 10. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1969), “Psychology and Religion: West and East,” CW 11. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1953), “Psychology and Alchemy,” CW 12. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1954), “The Practice of Psychotherapy,” CW 16, 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1975), Letters, 2 vol., ed. Gerhard Adler. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Leff, Gordon (1973), “Heresy in the Middle Ages,” Dictionary of the History of Ideas, II. New York: Charles Scribners’ Sons.
Lewis, Charlton & Charles Short (1969), A Latin Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sharp, Daryl (1991), Jung Lexicon: A Primer of Terms and Concepts. Toronto: Inner City Books



]]> smehrtens smehrtens@potlatchgroup.com http://jungiancenter.org/blog/blog_comment.asp?bi=44 2010-03-03T10:26:41-05:00 2010-03-03T10:26:41-05:00 2010-03-03T10:26:41-05:00
“Phoberon to empesein eis cheiras theou zontos.”
“It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.”
Hebrews 10:31
“… the experience of the self is always a defeat for the ego.”
[italics in the original] Jung, Collected Works, 14, ¶778


The first of the above quotes was cited in the previous blog essay and in a note in that essay I indicated that the following essay would provide further discussion of the “Hebrews” quote. In that essay I noted how fear can be used to keep people under control and how those in power would have us believe that internalizing a locus of security through personal experience of the Divine is something to be feared.
Jung had much to say on this point. Most explicitly he made it clear in his statement quoted above that confronting the Divine is never a pleasant experience for the ego. This is because of pride: the ego “does not like to think consciousness might lose its ascendancy.” The ego fancies it is in control and is forced to face its smallness and limitations when the Self appears.
More broadly, Jung addressed this issue in his discussions of the numen, the numinous, the numinosum and numinosity. In this essay we will define these terms, provide some features and qualities of the numinous, then consider the experience of the numinous and how it has been experienced by some noteworthy historical figures. We will then examine Jung’s experience of it, and Jung’s assessment of our current predicament, now that Western civilization has lost many of its numinosities.

Some Definitions

Numen is a Latin word, deriving from the verb nuere, meaning “to nod.” Its original meaning was “a nod.” You might well wonder how it comes to have anything to do with the Divine, the Self and Jung’s concerns. It came to mean “divine will or divine power of the gods” from the Greek and Roman practice of going to a temple to consult the will of the gods, at times when a person confronted a serious decision. In the temple the supplicant would stand before a statue of the god, state his problem, ask the god for guidance and then watch the statue. If it seemed to nod, the person knew the god approved the tack he planned to take. Over time numen came to be synonymous with “deity,” “Godhead,” divinity or “divine majesty.”
The other 3 words mentioned above—numinous, numinosum and numinosity—Jung used frequently and all of them derive from numen. “Numinous” was an invented word, coined in 1917 by a German professor of theology, Rudolf Otto, in his book Das Heilige (translated in 1923 as The Idea of the Holy). Why the invention? Otto felt the need for a specialized word to describe the concept of “holy” without the “moral factor” or rationality that we usually attach to “holy.” He sought to describe “… this ‘extra’ in the meaning of ‘holy’ above and beyond the meaning of goodness.” To create his neologism Otto started with numen and then looked for analogies. He found one in “omen,” the adjectival form of which is “ominous.” The adjective form of numen thus would be “numinous.” Otto used “numinous” to describe categories of value within the sense of “holy,” and also to refer to a state of mind.
Modern English dictionaries define “numinous” several ways. It can mean “spiritual, holy, divine” and also “ethereal, nebulous, intangible.” In Otto’s and Jung’s usage, “spiritual,” “holy,” “divine” and “intangible” capture most accurately the qualities they mean.
Numinosum is a word Jung used repeatedly. He may have borrowed it from Otto; perhaps the original German text had this Latinized version of “numinous.” I have not found it in the English translation. In his essay “Psychology and Religion” Jung provides a definition of numinosum:
“… a dynamic agency or effect not caused by an arbitrary act of will…. The numinosum—whatever its cause may be—is an experience of the subject independent of his will…. The numinosum is either a quality belonging to a visible object or the influence of an invisible presence that causes a peculiar alteration of consciousness….”
In Jung’s thinking the numinosum is both a quality inherent to an object or an experience that comes over a person, often inadvertently.

Qualities and Features of the Numinous

Otto and Jung provide a wealth of explicit qualities people are likely to feel when in the presence of the holy. First, it must be noted that the numinosum is a paradox, containing both positive and negative, both of which we may experience simultaneously in any encounter with the Divine.
Some of the positive qualities of the numinosum include: sublimity, awe, excitement, bliss, rapture, exaltation, entrancement, fascination, attraction, allure and what Otto called an “impelling motive power.” Not so pleasant are other qualities like: overwhelment, fear, trembling, weirdness, eeriness, humility (an acute sense of unworthiness), urgency, stupor (blank wonder), bewilderment, horror, mental agitation, repulsion, and haunting, daunting, monstrous feelings that “overbrim the heart.” Otto speaks at length of the mysterium tremendum et fascinans, the fascinating mystery that makes us tremble (in awe). Because it “grips or stirs the mind,” such an experience is not one we forget.
But, while it is memorable, the numinous is not easily put into words. “Ineffable” is another of its features. The numinous “eludes apprehension in terms of concepts.” Being bigger and beyond oneself, it induces speechlessness. Being a mystery, it bewilders the rational mind. Being divine, it links us to the “ground of the soul.” Being “unevolvable,” it is not to be derived from any other feeling.
More frequently found in Jung’s works is “numinosity.” He used this term to refer to a quality inherent in archetypes, in complexes, in “curiosities which the logical mind cannot explain.” Found in Western alchemy, and in cultural symbols, numinosity is that quality that gives religious ideas their “thrilling power.” Much as with archetypes, we can’t grasp the meaning of the word without personal experience. True understanding here comes from a lived encounter.
This is very consistent with Jung’s empiricism: what is real is what one experiences. Rudolf Otto’s study of the concept of holiness appealed to Jung because Otto took it out of the realm of theory and brought it into the realm of feelings, sensory experience and personal events in individual lives. Otto gave Jung both the vocabulary to discuss this aspect of psychology and confirmation of Jung’s own personal experience when he had encountered the Divine. What was this experience? What might we expect to experience when we contact the numinous?

The Experience of the Numinous

A wide variety of historical figures have tried to put into words their experience of the numinous. In the 1st century A.D. St. Paul spoke of it as “… the peace which passes all understanding.” The author of Hebrews found it fear-inducing, as noted in the quote opening this essay. In the 14th century Meister Eckhart described it as the “primal bottom” grounding the soul. Two centuries later Martin Luther referred to the numinous as the deus absconditus et incomprehensibilis, the hidden and incomprehensible god. In the 18th century Friedrich Schleiermacher suggested the numinous was the “intuition and feeling of the infinite.” The 19th century cultural historian John Ruskin described the “instinctive awe, mixed with delight; an indefinable thrill…” that he got in the presence of the numinous. A later contemporary of Ruskin, the American psychologist William James, studied the varieties of religious experience and referred to the numinous as “a sense of reality, a feeling of objective presence, a perception of … something there.” Jung was another person who experienced the numinous in life. What did it mean for him?

Jung’s Experiences

In his analytic work, Jung witnessed every day the power and impact the numinous had in the lives of patients wrestling with their complexes, encountering archetypes and confronting the unconscious. Coming from the collective unconscious, the numinous is uncontrollable and “outside conscious volition.” Often linked to synchronicity, the feeling of numinosity would grow in patients as the number of synchronous events became more numerous.
Jung saw in his own life, and in the lives of his patients and colleagues, just how powerful an impact the numinous can have. It can feed the “hunger of the soul” and provide feelings of liberation and relief. As much as it is ineffable, the numinous is also ineluctable: it cannot be ignored. When people tried to ignore its dictates, Jung saw how things started to go badly, eventually leading to physical symptoms as the Self tried to get the individual’s attention.
Jung felt that the numinous controlled our fate and could work a major transformation in us, e.g. in conversion experiences, in situations that produce emotional shocks, or, more pleasantly, in moments of illumination. Common to all these experiences is “affectivity:” powerful feelings are always involved in any encounter with the numinous.

A Richer Translation of Hebrews 10:31

Jung understood that “to have fallen into the hands of the living God”—that is, to be confronted with the Divine—would produce an affect, a feeling response. Most translations of the Greek of Hebrews 10:31 use the word “fearful,” as the response brought up when a person confronts the Self. But the original Greek captures more of the rich quality of the numinosum. Let’s examine the verse word-by-word.
Phoberon comes from the verb phobein, “to put to flight; to strike with fear; to terrify, frighten, alarm; to be seized with fear; to stand in awe of.” So phoberon is what causes a person to flee or feel fear.
Empesein is an infinitive in one of Greek’s past tenses, with the meaning of “to have fallen upon/chanced upon/fallen into…”, suggesting inadvertence, or an unintentional event or act.
Theou zontos is the periphrastic genitive, literally translated as “of the living god,” or what Jung means when he speaks of the self.
So Hebrews 10:31, as a verse, is a description of the personal experience of contact with the Self. A fuller translation, more nuanced and attuned to Jung’s understanding of the role of the numinous in the process of individuation would be: “When one has fallen into the hands of the Self (the living god within), it causes one to stand in ‘holy dread,’ with awe, fear and trembling.”
Jung felt that organized religions, with their rituals and dogmas, provide a “defense” against this experience. But those on the path of individuation cannot avoid it.

Our Current Predicament

Nor should we try to. Jung was clear about this and in his writings he repeatedly lamented the loss of numinosity in the modern world. Facing the decay and dissolution of society, Western culture has lost its raison d’être, which depends on numinosity.
Jung recognized that most people in the Western world today are closed to the irrational, reluctant to engage mystery or to allow themselves to be overpowered by numinous feelings. “Caught in the toils of egohood,” most people are mistrustful of anything they can’t see, touch, count or quantify. They are disoriented and dissociated because they have lost their moral and spiritual traditions.
Most people in our world live now without true spiritual leadership because religious leaders are more interested in protecting their institutions than in understanding the shift that has occurred in the psyche of Western people. Unable to understand the character of mystical experiences, people these days deny mysticism’s numinous nature. Those still “contained” in religion are leery of the numinous because numinous experiences often give rise to doubt. Too busy, too hurried, too harried to take the time to understand the meaning of numina, people refuse to take the time to come to terms with them.
Those on the path of individuation take the time. They have to: numinous dreams, synchronicities, and life experiences confront them frequently, calling up that “holy dread,” reminding the ego of its modest place compared to the Self.
A “new dispensation” is aborning in the closing years of the age of Pisces. Jung recognized this and he felt that those who had worked on themselves, those who had taken up the task of crucifying the ego and giving over control of their lives to the Self—such people would become carriers of Spirit, open to the experience of the numinous. An examination of Jung’s sense of this new dispensation, and the central role individuated persons will play in it, is the subject of the next essay.

Bibliography

Edinger, Edward (1996), The Aion Lecture: Exploring the Self in C.G. Jung’s Aion. Toronto: Inner City Books.
Elder, George & Dianne Cordic (2009), An American Jungian In Honor of Edward F. Edinger. Toronto: Inner City Books.
James, William (1961), The Varieties of Religious Experience. New York: Collier Books.
Jung, Carl (1956) “Symbols of Transformation,” Collected Works, 5, 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1966), “Two Essays on Analytical Psychology,” CW 7. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1960), ”The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche,” CW 8. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1970), “Civilization in Transition,” CW 10. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1969), “Psychology and Religion: West and East,” CW 11. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1953), “Psychology and Alchemy,” CW 12. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1967), “Alchemical Studies,” CW 13. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1963), “Mysterium Coniunctionis,” CW 14. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1954), “The Practice of Psychotherapy,” CW 16, 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1976), ”The Symbolic Life,” CW 18. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Lewis, Charlton & Charles Short (1969), A Latin Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Liddell, H.G. & Scott (1978), An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon. New York: Oxford University Press.
Otto, Rudolf (1958), The Idea of the Holy. New York: Oxford University Press.

]]> smehrtens smehrtens@potlatchgroup.com http://jungiancenter.org/blog/blog_comment.asp?bi=41 2010-01-02T10:00:23-05:00 2010-01-02T10:00:23-05:00 2010-01-02T10:00:23-05:00 Part III—Internalizing a Locus of Authority

A few years ago my sister took to wearing a button on her shirt as she went through her days on the University of Vermont campus. The button said “Question Authority.” She didn’t wear the button for long, because she found people’s reaction to the button so dispiriting: Most people would see it, read it and then say, “What should I ask you?”
This sad story illustrates a fact about our culture: We are not encouraged to internalize a locus of authority. We grow up looking to our parents, our teachers, the clergy, the police, political leaders, doctors, lawyers, judges and others as authority figures, and we are taught to honor these authorities. Jung would not be pleased. While he was no revolutionary, he never encouraged people to give over ultimate authority for their lives to any external figure. He felt that doing so was essentially an alienation of the self, a sign of spiritual immaturity and an abdication of the personal task to search for the truth.
Not even analysts did Jung exempt on this point. Early in his essay “Principles of Practical Psychotherapy,” Jung admonished analysts:
When, as a psychotherapist, I set myself up as a medical authority over my patient and on that account claim to know something about his individuality, or to be able to make valid statements about it, I am only demonstrating my lack of criticism, for I am in no position to judge the whole of the personality before me.... If I wish to treat another individual psychologically at all, I must for better or worse give up all pretensions to superior knowledge, all authority and desire to influence.
My analyst describes the relationship of Jungian analyst to client as one where both parties are “in the soup together.” That is, both analyst and analysand are affected by the process and both must defer to the wisdom of the psyche.
Jung reserves some of his most sarcastic comments for those who externalize their locus of authority by becoming disciples of a guru. When discussing negative attempts to free the individuality in “The Relations between the Ego and the Unconscious,” Jung wrote:
... the joy of becoming a prophet’s disciple... for the vast majority of people, is an altogether ideal technique. Its advantages are: the odium dignitatis, the superhuman responsibility of the prophet, turns into the so much sweeter otium indignitatis. The disciple is unworthy; modestly he sits at the Master’s feet and guards against having ideas of his own. Mental laziness becomes a virtue; one can at least bask in the sun of a semidivine being. He can enjoy the archaism and infantilism of his unconscious fantasies without loss to himself, for all responsibility is laid at the Master’s door. Through his deification of the Master, the disciple, apparently without noticing it, waxes in stature; moreover, does he not possess the great truth—not his own discovery, of course, but received straight from the Master’s hands? Naturally the disciples always stick together, not out of love, but for the very understandable purpose of effortlessly confirming their own convictions by engendering an air of collective agreement.
The result? Both master and disciples get inflated (since both are identifying with an archetype). The disciple looses his/her spiritual freedom. His individuality is injured. Life for both prophet and disciple is “full of sorrows, disappointments and privations,...” Put on a pedestal by his followers, the master/prophet teeters precariously and almost inevitably eventually succumbs to the moral evils of power, lust and/or greed. The disciple is infantilized and sorely disillusioned when his guru turns out to have feet of clay.
At the Jungian Center for the Spiritual Sciences, we got a first-hand look at this whole process this past Spring and Summer 2009, when one of our students got involved with the work of Dr. Zhi Gang Sha. Interested in his system of soul healing, she went to several of his workshops, came back and urged us to look into Sha’s work, because Sha is quite explicit in his belief that the soul is real, powerful and should be the “boss” of one’s life.
Aware of Jung’s conviction that the psyche (soul) is real, we jumped at the chance to investigate the work of someone else (from a very different, Oriental, not Western background) who recognizes the reality of the soul. So we offered to the public two workshops led by two students of Master Sha. In these workshops it was clear that they had tremendous respect for their master, even to the point of venerating his books (which were not to be put on the floor). Some of us began to be skeptical—what one student called “spotting a red flag.”
Then we were told that the Master could remove karma from past lives, as long as you bought $1,000 worth of his books. Another red flag.
Then came the pitch to attend the Master’s enlightenment retreat, at which one’s level of “soul standing” would be raised—for the cost of attendance, of course. Another red flag.
Finally, a group of us went to a workshop led by the Master himself. We saw people seeking to kiss his feet, to kiss the ground he walked on, to prostrate themselves, to wait on him hand and foot. More red flags.
But it was when Master Sha announced to the group that he had elevated Jesus, Mary and Buddha to a higher level of Heaven that we had incontrovertible proof of the inflation that Jung describes as one of the features of the guru syndrome. Jung would have none of this. We left the workshop on the spot.

The Positive Authority Figure

Jung had no good words for those who set themselves up as authority figures and then take their followers’ authority from them. But he was not completely opposed to gurus: they just had to be inner gurus. The medieval alchemists (especially Paracelsus) were Jung’s models here. The alchemical literature is full of references to “the stone,” “Christ,” “Khidri” —all symbols of the inner authority that develops over the course of the alchemical opus. Paracelsus was particularly adept at attacking the old authorities—Galen, Avicenna, Rhazes and others—and putting in their place the authenticity of his own personal experience of nature. Over the course of his experimentation Paracelsus developed an inner guru that he knew he could trust.
Jung did likewise in creating his body of psychological wisdom. He tried something and if it worked and helped his patients, it became part of his system, regardless of how the “authorities” in medicine, psychiatry, or psychology regarded it. Hence Jung’s open-mindedness about things like astrology and the I Ching. He worked with these ancient systems, saw first-hand how useful they can be, and so incorporated them into his armamentarium of techniques.
The positive authority figure lies within. This inner energy often shows up in our dreams of an Old Wise Man or Woman. Sometimes it can be the spirit of a long-dead figure, like the 8th-9th c. Hindu saint Shankaracharya. When your inner wisdom figure shows up you’ll know it, because, like all archetypes, this figure carries numinosity.
Internalizing this inner guru, Jung felt, is part of the process of becoming an adult. It takes effort and time to do so and Jung was aware that it is not something most people would have the maturity to do:
... mankind is, in essentials, psychologically still in a state of childhood—a stage that cannot be skipped. The vast majority needs authority, guidance, law. This fact cannot be overlooked. The Pauline overcoming of the law falls only to the man who knows how to put his soul in the place of conscience. Very few are capable of this (“Many are called, but few are chosen”). And these few tread this path only from inner necessity, not to say suffering, for it is sharp as the edge of a razor.
“Inner necessity” drives the mature person into this work, despite the suffering that is an inevitable part of it. Balancing the suffering are a wealth of benefits.

Benefits of Internalizing a Locus of Authority

Unlike disciples always looking to the master for direction, persons who “authorize their own lives” are able to make their own decisions. Jung regards those who externalize their locus of authority as “spectators” at their own lives, while those who live guided by an inner authority are active agents in the creation of reality.
A second benefit to authorizing one’s own life is that your guru is always present: you don’t have to go consult somebody else when you have to make a decision. No one else is running your life; no outside “other” is determining your fate. You have the opportunity (and the obligation) to decide for yourself.
Most importantly, internalizing a locus of authority benefits our self-esteem. We aren’t giving over the direction of our lives to someone else. We recognize our adult status and act like adults in the knowledge and awareness that we have an ever-present inner guidance system that we can trust.
Such an inner presence is of inestimable value in helping us feel safe in the world. This brings us to the final component of individuation: internalizing a locus of security, which is the subject of Part IV of this essay.

Bibliography

________ (1966), “Two Essays on Analytical Psychology,” CW 7. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1960), ”The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche,” CW 8. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1959), ”The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious,” CW 9i. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1959), “Aion,” Collected Works, 9ii. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1969), “Psychology and Religion: West and East,” CW 11. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1967), “Alchemical Studies,” CW 13. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1954), “The Practice of Psychotherapy,” CW 16. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1976), ”The Symbolic Life,” CW 18. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Keen, Sam (1992), “Dying Gods and Borning Spirits,” Noetic Sciences Review.
Sha, Zhi Gang (2006), Soul Mind Body Medicine. Novato CA: New World Library.
________ (2008a), Soul Communication. New York: Atria Books.
________ (2008b), Soul Wisdom. New York: Atria Books.
________ (2009), The Power of Soul. New York: Atria Books.





]]> smehrtens smehrtens@potlatchgroup.com http://jungiancenter.org/blog/blog_comment.asp?bi=40 2009-12-01T05:35:24-05:00 2009-12-01T05:35:24-05:00 2009-12-01T05:35:24-05:00 Part II—Internalizing a Locus of Control

In Part I of this four-part essay we noted that a pre-requisite for achieving individuation was internalizing a locus of control. What does this mean?

Defining “Locus of Control”

I encountered the term “locus on control” in the works of Jungian analyst and astrologer Liz Greene. It refers to the placement (locus) of one’s sense of responsibility or power. In the normal course of child development, the locus of control gradually shifts over time from the parents to the adolescent until the mature adult recognizes and takes up his/her responsibility for living as a well-functioning adult in society.
Jung’s consulting room was full of people whose personal development from child to adult was not normal. Jung’s clients had parents who were negligent, slothful, neurotically anxious or soullessly conventional. Or their parents were clingy, and, as a result “... exercise an extremely bad influence over their children, since they deprive them of every opportunity for individual responsibility.” Others of Jung’s clients were scarred from years of carrying their parents’ unconscious complexes, and, lacking the wherewithal to assimilate that complex, they remained stuck in “infantilism.” Other clients had lived unconscious lives, “carried by society and to that extent [were] relieved of [their] responsibility.” Whatever the personal history, the core situation was the same: externalization of a locus of control, an abdication of personal responsibility.

Jung on Responsibility, the “Blame Game” and the “Search for the Magical Other”

Jung’s writings are replete with calls for individuals to recognize and take up personal responsibility:
... the maturing personality must assimilate the parental complex and achieve authority, responsibility, and independence.
… you could treat yourself if you don’t succumb to the prejudice that you receive healing through others. In the last resort every individual alone has to win his battle, nobody else can do it for him.
... every man is, in a certain sense, unconsciously a worse man when he is in society than when acting alone; for he is carried by society and to that extent relieved of his individual responsibility.
The bettering of a general ill begins with the individual, and then only when he makes himself and not others responsible.
Making others responsible is what some call playing the “blame game.” When we play the “blame game,” we blame others for our current situation, and these “others” are most often our parents or other adults who played a prominent role in our upbringing. Jung provides an example of the blame game in “Symbols of Transformation:”
Faced by the vast uncertainty of the future, the adolescent puts the blame for it on the past, saying to himself: “If only I were not the child of my very ordinary parents, but the child of a rich and elegant count... then one day a golden coach would come and... take... his long-lost child back with him to his wonderful castle,...
Clearly, Jung was familiar with this fruitless fantasy. He probably had many patients who were into playing the blame game. He recognized it as a morally lazy and ultimately frustrating endeavor, as he explained to a Swiss Fräulein in a letter of 23 January 1941:
There are a whole lot of facts in your letter which you’ll just have to face up to instead of tracing them back to the faulty behavior of other people…. There are countless people with an inferior extraversion or with too much introversion or with too little money who in God’s name must plod along through life under such conditions. These conditions are not diseases but normal difficulties of life. If you blame me for your psychological difficulties it won’t help you at all, for it is not my fault you have them. It’s nobody’s fault. I can’t take these difficulties away from you, but have merely tried to make you aware of what you need in order to cope with them. If you could stop blaming other people and external circumstances for your own inner difficulties you would have gained an infinite amount. But if you go on making others responsible, no one will have any desire to stand by you with advice.
As long as we see our problems as “out there,” caused by others, as long as we focus on assigning blame, we are refusing to face our own responsibility for dealing with the hand that Fate has dealt us.
This is not to say that Jung absolved parents of blame. He was quite blunt that most children who were brought to him with psychological problems were not the people he really needed to treat. Most of the time “problem children” were carrying their parents’ complexes and
In a case like this what would be the sense of talking to the child?... Such a procedure would ... burden her with a responsibility which is not hers at all, but really belongs to her parents....
Jung would then try to treat the parent or parents, but sometimes the parents didn’t want to hear that their unconsciousness was the real cause of their child’s problem. Rather than take up analysis with Jung themselves, they would leave.
It is not uncommon for people to have experienced poor parenting. Lots of us have come away from our youth scarred, warped or injured from all sorts of tragic events. Jung was explicit that, whatever our personal histories, the key to successful living is accepting that, as adults, we are responsible for the rest of our lives. If in some way or ways our life is not working, blaming others will only keep us stuck in our “stuff.”
Likewise, searching for the “magical other” who will transform our reality and bring us happiness is another trap that will keep us stuck. James Hollis, Jungian analyst and prolific author, wrote on this “search for the magical other” in his book The Eden Project. He describes the “Magical Other” as that person who “will lift from us the terrible weight of our freedom and responsibility.” But he notes that “no one can ever do that.”
Given our “culture of longing,” we don’t want to hear this. I encounter many people in my work who continue to search, year after year, for a “magical other” who will solve their problems, relieve their loneliness, fix their finances, or serve as a buffer from the cold world outside. These people don’t want to hear that responsibility for all these complaints rests with themselves. They continue to externalize a locus of control.

Why does this matter?

There are several reasons why this matters. First, externalizing a locus of control infantilizes. Jung is explicit about this. Living without taking responsibility for one’s life keeps us immature. It stunts our growth and thwarts our development.
Second, externalizing a locus of control fosters our gullibility and impressionability, at a time and in a culture where a finely honed faculty of discrimination and a critical mind are essential. Lacking an inner locus of control, we become prey to sly politicians, lying business people, shrewd salesmen and slick con artists eager to sell us a line or bilk us of our fortune.
A third reason why internalizing a locus of control matters relates to the Jungian concept of projection. When we look at our life and see problems—situations that we don’t like, relationships that aren’t working—and then expect or demand that others change, we are projecting our own unconsciousness on to others. A very common example of this is the following: A Persephone woman comes into my office complaining that her husband is a wastrel, spends all the money, leaves her little to buy food and pay the rent, and acts more or less like a little kid (he’s a puer). Her response to this situation is to wait, hoping that he will grow up. She is expecting him to change. She is projecting her own power (and puer) on to the husband, refusing to see that she is the only person in this situation who is likely to bring about a change. Days, weeks, months, even years may go by in this classic scenario, until one of three things happens: the husband dies (possibly having bankrupted the family one or more times first); the finances become so precarious that, faced with the imminent loss of their home, the woman kicks the husband out and takes up the challenge of living her own life; or the woman wakes up to the reality of her projections, internalizes her locus of control, takes back the power she projected on to her husband, and sets about creating a reality that works for her. This last is, of course, better than the other possibilities, but also the least likely, given that it requires the Persephone woman to make a descent into her inner underworld to access and assimilate her power.
A final (and, to Jung, the most important) reason why internalizing a locus of control matters is that externalizing a locus of control precludes individuation. We will never be able to liberate ourselves from the wounds of parental complexes until we stop playing the blame game and take responsibility for healing our lives. We will never be able to move into the fullness of our being as long as we keep searching for the magical other who will remove all our problems and create a world of bliss. The most basic of all components of individuation is facing the reality that “My life is mine and nobody else’s; I am responsible for what my life becomes; I am in control of my destiny and I can determine my future.”
No change is possible unless we change. As Gandhi reminded us, “we must be the change we wish to see in the world.” No one else is going to make it happen but us. And no one but us can internalize our locus of control.
Just as important to individuation as internalizing a locus of control is internalizing a locus of authority. That is the subject of Part III of this essay.

Bibliography

Bolen, Jean Shinoda (1984), Goddesses in Everywoman. New York: Harper & Row.
Greene, Liz & Howard Sasportas (1987), The Development of the Personality. York Beach ME: Samuel Weiser.
Hillman, James (1979), The Puer Papers. Dallas TX: Spring Publications.
Hollis, James (1998), The Eden Project: The Search for the Magical Other. Toronto: Inner City Books.
Jung, Carl (1956) “Symbols of Transformation,” Collected Works, 5, 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1966), “Two Essays on Analytical Psychology,” CW 7. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1960), ”The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche,” CW 8. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1959), ”The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious,” CW 9i. Princeton:
Princeton University Press.
________ (1954), “The Development of Personality,” CW 17. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1976), ”The Symbolic Life,” CW 18. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Neumann, Erich (1956), Amor and Psyche: The Psychic Development of the Feminine. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Perera, Sylvia Brinton (1981), Descent to the Goddess: A Way of Initiation for Women. Toronto: Inner City Press.
von Franz, Marie-Louise (1970), Puer Aeternus. Boston: Sigo Press.





]]> smehrtens smehrtens@potlatchgroup.com http://jungiancenter.org/blog/blog_comment.asp?bi=39 2009-11-03T09:28:32-05:00 2009-11-03T09:28:32-05:00 2009-11-03T09:28:32-05:00 Part I—What is Individuation?

“Individuation” is a term often associated with Jung and his psychology. In this four-part essay we are going to define “individuation” and discuss some of the benefits, elements and requirements for achieving individuation (Part I). Then we’ll examine several components of it, specifically the locus of control (Part II), the locus of authority (Part III) and the locus of security (Part IV).

What is “Individuation”?

Our English word comes from the Latin individuus, meaning “undivided” or “individual.” The dictionary defines “individuation” as “the process leading to individual existence, as distinct from that of the species.” This definition applies the term to both animals and humans. Jung’s usage focused on humans and the concept became central to his approach to psychology.
Jung recognized the importance he placed on individuation in his 1921 definition of the term:
The concept of individuation plays a large role in our psychology. In general, it is the process by which individual beings are formed and differentiated; in particular, it is the development of the psychological individual... as a being distinct from the general, collective psychology. Individuation, therefore, is a process of differentiation... having for its goal the development of the individual personality.
In later years, Jung amplified his definition in a series of essays, describing “individuation” as
... the process by which a person becomes a psychological “in-dividual,” that is a separate, indivisible unity or “whole.”
...the better and more complete fulfillment of the collective qualities of the human being,...
... practically the same as the development of consciousness out of the original state of identity.... It is thus an extension of the sphere of consciousness, an enriching of conscious psychological life.
... becoming an “in-dividual,” and, in so far as “individuality” embraces our innermost, last, and incomparable uniqueness, it also implies becoming one’s own self. We could therefore translate individuation as “coming to selfhood,” or “self-realization.”
Jung felt this process of “self-realization” was a “natural transformation,” something that “the unconscious had in mind,” something meant to develop our individual personality.
Jung also regarded “individuation” as a solution to what he considered one of the major problems facing modern people: How to link up consciousness to the unconscious; how to bring our ego mind (consciousness) into a working relationship with our inner terra incognita, our unknown inner terrain. Concern about this problem was not unique to Jung: thousands of years ago Taoist and Buddhist practitioners had also seen its significance. Jung recognized this when he noted that “... the individuation process ... forms one of the main interests of Taoism and of Zen Buddhism.” Coming from a Christian background, as the son of a Protestant minister, Jung also recognized a Christian relevance to the concept, when he described individuation as “... the primitive Christian idea of the Kingdom of Heaven which ‘is within you’.”
Aware of Western culture’s vaunting of individualism, Jung took pains to stress the difference between “individualism” and “individuation.” The former concept is ego-driven and fosters selfishness and lack of concern for others. (Think of the bumper sticker that celebrates “Looking out for #1!”). Individuation is very much the opposite: Over the years of inner work the process requires, the person experiences repeated crucifixions of the ego as the ego confronts and assimilates contents of the unconscious. This long-term process
... brings to birth a consciousness of human community precisely because it makes us aware of the unconscious, which unites and is common to all mankind. Individuation is an at-one-ment with oneself and at the same time with humanity, since oneself is a part of humanity.
So, far from being selfish, an individuated person feels deeper responsibility to support and serve others and to foster peace, wholeness and integrity in the world.

Some Requirements of the Process of Individuation

Mention of crucifying the ego brings up the subject of what individuation entails. It’s challenging, a task for heroes, not for the faint of heart or for those who can’t stand against the crowd and be different. Divisio (being divided not only from others but also within oneself), separatio (being separated not only from family, friends and collective society, but also from the person you used to be), solutio (watching the structures of your life dissolve), discrimination, self-knowledge, “a positive torture” —these are just a few of the hardships likely to be faced in this work. Jung was being honest about the task when he warned “...as always every step forward along the path of individuation is achieved only at the cost of suffering.”
Why such difficulty? Jung gives several reasons. First, we grow up under parents and society, striving to become what is expected of us and the result is what Jung called the development of the “persona,” or mask. In many cases, the persona is not our true self. We have had to compromise, adapt, even, in extreme cases, betray our authentic nature. The process of individuation requires getting wise to this mask, that is, we have to face the fact that for years (if not decades) we have been living a lie. And then we have to give up this lie, put down the mask and begin to change our life so as to live more aligned with our authentic being. Such change almost inevitably elicits remarks (maybe even protests) from those who know us best, those most deeply invested in how we used to be, those likely to be most affected by our shifting the parameters of daily life, i.e. our family and closest friends.
Second, individuation requires heroism because it is hard to be different, to step out of the mainstream conventional reality and march to one’s own drummer. The work is not a herd phenomenon. You aren’t going to find many people doing it. For this reason Extraverts, who tend to resonate with the collective and appreciate group activities, find the process harder than Introverts.
A third difficulty comes from the self-knowledge that is part of the process. “Self-knowledge” means becoming conscious of the unconscious: facing our shadow and becoming aware of the reality of our “inner partner,” the animus (for women) or the anima (for men). The work of individuation takes us through the “swamplands of the soul” in the nigredo phase mentioned in an earlier essay. While Jung was clear that the unconscious takes to us the attitude we take to it, for most people it takes a while (if it ever happens at all!) to develop a cheerful attitude toward the unconscious.
By this point you might well be wondering “Why bother?” Yes, Jung put great emphasis on achieving individuation but if it’s so difficult, why make the effort? Jung suggests multiple benefits.

Benefits of Achieving Individuation

Let’s mention the personal benefits first. Jung was explicit that the work of individuation was
... absolutely indispensable because, through his contamination with others, [the human being] falls into situations and commits actions which bring him into disharmony with himself.... there is begotten a compulsion to be and to act in a way contrary to one’s own nature. Accordingly a man ... feels himself to be in a degrading, unfree, unethical condition.... deliverance from this condition will come only when he can be and act as he feels is conformable with his true self.
Achieving individuation allows us to be and act in conformity with our true self.
There are other personal benefits. If we stay on the path, stick with the work, we come to enjoy a widened circle of consciousness. Our sense of separateness ends and we gain broader, more intense relationships with others.
We also experience the apocatastasis mentioned in the previous blog essay—that “restoration” or reconstitution of our being that makes the travail of the apocalypse seem well worth the suffering. Life works better. We feel deep in our bones that what we are doing, how we are living, with whom we are living (our new circle of friends) is what our soul intends for us. The quality of the people we draw into our life is better (“like finds like”). We know that the employment we take up has purchase on our soul. Our values mesh with our lifestyle and our actions speak our soul purpose.
We feel liberated from the unconsciousness of our parents, which permits our feeling “... a genuine sense of ... true individuality.” At the same time as we experience a greater feeling of freedom from our past, we also experience an “... absolute, binding and indissoluble communion with the world at large.”
Which brings us to the societal benefits of individuation. Time and again Jung stressed in his work that individuals matter (see the essay on “Jung’s Timelessness” in the archive of this blog). Anyone of us could be “the makeweight that tips the scales,” and so, in our taking up the task of individuating, each of us is undertaking “... a healing with with universal impact” and “... laying up an infinitesimal gram in the scales of humanity’s soul.” Given the critical nature of our time (as described in earlier essays), Jung would regard no individual activity to be more meaningful and useful than becoming individuated.
In the second part of this essay, we will examine one of the most basic components—a prerequisite—for individuation: internalizing a locus of control.

Bibliography

Hollis, James (1996), Swamplands of the Soul. Toronto: Inner City Books.
Jung, Carl Gustav (1971), “Psychological Types,” CW 6. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1966), “Two Essays on Analytical Psychology,” CW 7. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1959), ”The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious,” CW 9i. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1970), “Civilization in Transition,” CW 10. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1969), “Psychology and Religion: West and East,” CW 11. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1954), “The Practice of Psychotherapy,” CW 16. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Sharp, Daryl (1991), Jung Lexicon: A Primer of Terms and Concepts. Toronto: Inner City Books










]]> Susan Mehrtens smehrtens@potlatchgroup.com http://jungiancenter.org/blog/blog_comment.asp?bi=38 2009-09-29T10:58:36-05:00 2009-09-29T10:58:36-05:00 2009-09-29T10:58:36-05:00 Seizing the Opportunity in the Archetype of the Apocalypse

“Apocatastasis.” It’s a five-dollar Greek word that Jung used repeatedly in his writings, drawing on earlier usage in the New Testament and the Gnostic gospels. It means a “re-establishment,” “restoration” or “reconstitution,” and, as we noted in the previous essay, it is part of the intentionality of the archetype of the apocalypse. No person goes through the apocalyptic process simply to experience the destruction of what he or she holds dear: the whole point is to clear away the detritus of a life that he or she has outgrown. In a similar way our collective global society is now being challenged to open up to radically new ways of thinking, so as to replace a civilization that has grown stale and inappropriate with a world that works for everyone.
The initial reaction of most people to this challenge is “Duh? Radically new ways of thinking? Replacing a civilization? A stale civilization? A Rip Van Winkle act sounds appealing right about now; let’s go to sleep for the next 40 years and wake up when all this is over!” Jung would not be amused; he would also not be surprised.
Jung recognized that most people will take the Rip Van Winkle approach, only they won’t need to go to sleep: they already are asleep, and they won’t want to hear any of the following. Jung was a realist: only a “leading minority” will have the maturity, the consciousness and the courage to transform the world. Fortunately, since Jung’s time, as the world has gotten more and more “stale,” more and more people have been taking up his challenge and have responded to the apocalypse archetype to restore and revitalize their own lives. As they have done so they have also taken up the task of envisioning a similar restoration for the collective. They have shared their insights and suggestions in a wealth of books and articles that inform the portrait of a civilization more supportive of the fullness of our human potential.
In this essay we consider what such a civilization would look like, its features, activities and paradigms (basic patterns that structure underlying beliefs and assumptions). Because this new “restored” civilization is growing out of the old, we must begin with a review of the basic features of the world we know. Then we can examine how that world is no longer appropriate, what might replace it and the form a global restoration might take.

Some Basic Features of Western Civilization

When we speak of “civilization” these days invariably we mean the life ways of the peoples of Europe, America and other “progressive” countries. Superficially this “Western” civilization means “high technologies” like television, cell phones and computers, and cultural artifacts like movies, pop stars, video games and the Internet. This civilization offers to the people of the world sophisticated forms of medical care—hospitals with their CAT scans and MRIs; germ theory, vaccines and the promise of the eradication of disease; “spare-parts” medicine, the evolution of super-bugs, and the prospect of global pandemics--pandemics made more likely because of growing urbanization, as more and more people flock to cities, turning them into megalopolises. It also has enmeshed the entire planet in corporate capitalism, with its credit default swaps, collateralized debt obligations and other types of derivatives, etherealized money and massive economic inequality. Some other features of our current civilization include literacy, numeracy, digeracy, indoor plumbing, electricity, cars, trains, planes and supertankers.
All these are “superficial” because they are consequences of much deeper aspects of our Western civilization. These deeper aspects are so deep as to touch into what German-speaking societies mean when they speak of “culture” as distinct from “civilization.” The German tradition recognizes a difference between the artificial constructs of city living (“civilization” deriving from the Latin civitas, “city”) and the more organic growth of collective ways of living. The archetype of the apocalypse is asking us to address themes that have evolved organically over millennia—paradigms that are much deeper than our technological gadgets and ways of running our economic and political systems. To deal with such deep themes we must get to unconscious levels, to address and change things so basic that they seem “normal” or inevitable.
What are some of these deep themes that have grown organically over the last 6,000 years in the development of Western civilization? We will consider 6 of them, all closely interrelated, and we will do so by drawing on the insights of contemporary authors but also on the ideas of an enlightened human being who was 2,000 years ahead of his time.

How Our Current World is No Longer Appropriate

The six themes we will examine are: power relations, social relations, gender relations, racial and ethnic prejudice, economic injustice and our beliefs and attitudes around violence.
Power Relations. For many millennia the world has operated with a flawed notion of power. We think of power as “domination,” the ability to control, to force other people to do our will. The lust for control is very strong in our Western mindset, leading us to develop our left brain’s logic, reasoning ability and objectivity. Over many centuries this has grown into what we now term “science.” Francis Bacon (one of the fathers of modern science) was explicit about the desirability of gaining control over Nature, so we can bend her to our will.
Another feature of this power-driven mindset is dualistic thinking, which perceives reality in “either/or” terms. In this system power is a “zero-sum game:” If I have power then you don’t. This then creates competition and fear. Politically this evolved over many thousands of years into monarchies and tyrannies and, in our own day, into totalitarian regimes and “imperial Presidencies.” Power-as-domination also gave rise to colonialism and imperialism, in which collectives employ force and military might to control weaker groups for their own advantage.
Legally the power relations of Western civilization have led to the law being subverted to maintain the perquisites of the privileged few. This has been blatant in various monarchical regimes, more subtle in modern democracies. Certainly we have seen this recently in America, in the spectacle of Bernie Madoff enjoying his penthouse apartment rather than a jail cell.
In social terms, power-as-domination has given rise to an array of artificial distinctions among people, from slavery (in the ancient world and currently in parts of Africa and even the United States) to the rigid caste system in India. While most Americans like to think of our society as being class free, we too have privileged classes. Consider, for example, the corporate CEOs flying to Washington in their private jets, seeking handouts from Congress. Little was said about their having these jets; the complaints in the media spoke more to the inappropriate use of the jets at the very time they were crying poverty.
Such tone deafness on the part of these businessmen reflects another implication of the power-as-domination theme: egotism and narcissism. “Looking out for #1” has become a mantra in our modern world. “What’s in it for me?” is a common question people ask. Power as a zero-sum game comes accompanied by an overweaning sense of entitlement and other forms of narcissism, like lack of consideration for the needs and feelings of others, lack of compassion and empathy, and insatiable greed.
The lust for control early on tainted the spiritual expression of “civilized” people, leading to the rise of organized religions with their dogma about “original sin,” Hell, the Day of Judgment etc. —all concepts very effective in making people feel guilty, fearful and then disempowered.
Yet it was a figure connected with a Western religion, a figure deeply revered—and also profoundly misunderstood and misinterpreted—who saw through the power system of our culture, sought to upend its processes and called on his followers to do likewise. Here is what he said:
For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted. (Matt. 23:8-12)
An argument started among the disciples as to which of them would be the greatest. Jesus, knowing their thoughts, took a little child and had him stand beside him. Then he said to them, “Whoever welcomes this little child in my name welcomes me; and whoever welcomes me welcomes the one who sent me. For he who is least among you all—he is the greatest.” (Luke 9:46-48)
Also a dispute arose among them as to which of them was considered to be greatest. Jesus said to them, “The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and those who exercise authority over them call themselves Benefactors. But you are not to be like that. Instead, the greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who rules like the one who serves. For who is greater, the one who is at the table or the one who serves? Is it not the one who is at the table? But I am among you as one who serves.” (Luke 22:24-27)
Jesus’ vision of the “servant leader” has inspired more recent commentators and businesspeople to apply his sense of power—power as “dominion,” power that is shared with others, power that empowers others—in modern life and work situations. Jesus understood that true power is like love: the more we give it away, the more power there is for everyone.
Social Relations. Our civilization has existed for thousands of years conceiving of relations between people in hierarchical ways. The most obvious form of this is that most masculine of environments, the military, with all its ranks and privileges, but all societies have differences in status and elaborate rules governing social etiquette and family obligations. Even in America, which purports to have a society where anyone can rise to the top, there are certain socially accepted behaviors, and Americans certainly celebrate one aspect of hierarchical social relations: competition. We live in a world with “winners” and “losers,” with “one-upmanship” and all sorts of “perks” that go along with “getting ahead.”
These “perks” are most likely material things, because we define “success” in material terms: money, status symbols like the corner office, the private jet, the membership in the country club etc. While “sumptuary laws” tried to regulate the display of status symbols in past centuries, today these laws have been replaced with “pay to play:” If you are rich enough, you can buy your way into the inner sanctum, get the cushy job, bribe your local politician to gain access to the “corridors of power.”
Ours is a civilization deeply sunk in materialism. Critics of Western culture decry our “conspicuous consumption,” with its excess and waste (with the United States being one of most wasteful of all modern societies). Ask anyone today what they think of when they hear the phrase “That man is very successful.” and they are likely to speak of his being rich, having a big salary, a powerful job, fame or celebrity and lots of stuff—all the “toys” that go along with the notion of “success.” What gets ignored in all this is the wealth that lies in things of the spirit.
Such materialistic preoccupations and social hierarchies Jesus castigated:
And he said to them, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’ and ‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.’ But you say that if a man says to his father or mother: ‘Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is Corban’ (that is, a gift devoted to God), then you no longer let him do anything for his father or mother. Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.” (Mark 7:9-13)
“I tell you the truth,” Jesus replied, “no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age (homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields—and with them, persecutions) and in the age to come, eternal life. But many who are first will be last, and the last first.” (Mark 10:29-30)
“Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.” (Matt 6:19-21)
Jesus understood that the only form of true security is spiritual, intangible, rooted within us, impossible for others to remove or destroy. Equally, he saw all our social and religious traditions as man-made, rather than rooted in the ways of the Divine. And he knew that those who put themselves first, who focus on social prominence, ranks and success ultimately wind up last.
Gender Relations. As many contemporary scholars have shown, with civilization came patriarchy. Agricultural surplus led to the rise of labor specialization and cities, and along with it came the notion of private property. There was more to this notion than just control over food: It also extended to control over women. Gender relations for the last c. 6,000 years have been patriarchal. Family training and example have perpetuated oppressive sex roles for hundreds of generations all over the world. We think we in the West are more liberal and progressive than cultures in, say, the Middle East or China, but even in America we have a host of cultural features that reflect our patriarchal bias.
For example, one deep assumption in our culture is “male is normal.” For years medical researchers developed protocols for drug studies using men, never thinking that perhaps this might reflect a certain bias. For years schools ran athletic programs for boys, never thinking that girls might also benefit from varsity teams and equal opportunity. Now this is changing, but some aspects of patriarchy have not changed: women are still objectified (think cosmetic ads, Victoria Secret ads, the Miss America pageant etc.); women still buy into being labeled “Mrs. John Smith;” women are still acculturated to feel incomplete without a husband.
More seriously we still see “sexploitation” (e.g. on cable TV stations like Spike); child abuse, domestic violence, rape and the rape of Mother Earth in activities like mining and oil drilling. There is still sex slavery and it is far more widespread around the globe than most Americans would like to think (including being found even in the U.S.A.). There are still repeated demands to control female sexuality, in public demonstrations against abortion, pornography and “vice.” The business world is not yet free of sexual harassment and “machismo” is still rampant in “action” flicks and many cultures.
As with other themes Jesus offered a new model for gender relations. He welcomed women into his circle of followers. Women were some of the greatest supporters of his work, housing him and his disciples, and supplying him with food and other essentials. Jesus defied both custom and social prejudice to talk with the Samaritan woman at the well. The first people Jesus appeared to after his resurrection were women. And it seems that Jesus inspired even the misogynistic Paul to admit that “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” The deeply-rooted paradigm that maintains gender inequality is another aspect of civilization that has become inappropriate.
Racial and Ethnic Prejudice is a fourth feature of our current civilization that is inappropriate. This feature is built on the dualistic thinking mentioned earlier—the “us/them” tendency we have to see things in divisive ways. Prejudice has produced tribalism, ethnocentricism, stereotyping and racial profiling—all of these undergirded by the unconscious belief that “difference is dangerous.” People that look different, act differently, believe differently pose a threat. The result? Pogroms, genocides, “ethnic cleansings” and holocausts. Less grave, but no less divisive are the nationalism and patriotism that are still very much features of our world.
It is long past time for us to put aside such nonsense, to recognize that nations are atavisms, that race is a canard, that ethnic differences are to be celebrated, not made the basis for purges and persecutions. Patriotism serves only to separate people and to emphasize superficial differences. We need now to focus on unity, how all the peoples of the planet are one. Jesus’ follower Peter came to recognize this:
“You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with a Gentile or visit him. But God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. So when I was sent for, I came without raising any objection. May I ask why you sent for me?” Cornelius answered: “Four days ago I was in my house praying at this hour, at three in the afternoon. Suddenly a man in shining clothes stood before me and said, ‘Cornelius, God has heard your prayer and remembered your gifts to the poor. Send to Joppa for Simon who is called Peter. He is a guest in the home of Simon the tanner, who lives by the sea.’ So I sent for you immediately, and it was good of you to come. Now we are all here in the presence of God to listen to everything the Lord has commanded you to tell us.” Then Peter began to speak: “I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism but accepts men from every nation who fear him and do what is right….” (Acts 10:23-35)
As a recent television ad reminds us, “We are all in this together.” “Us/them” thinking, and the prejudice that it sparks are no longer things we can afford. If we continue to feel and act from an “us/them” mindset, the world might experience the most dire manifestation of the archetype of the apocalypse!
Economic Injustice. Underlying the economic injustice that is endemic globally is the “scarcity model.” Embedded in this paradigm is another set of unconscious beliefs, some of which are: “There is not enough.” “I need to protect what’s mine.” “I have to get mine while the getting is good.” It leads to behaviors like hoarding, competition for global resources and war. It sparks feelings of fear and a host of insecurities that ripple through our culture now, as we experience an economic “slump.” What is never mentioned in the media is the why behind our current economic malaise. We hear lots of talk of reckless trading, too much risk-taking by the big banks, the misuse of computer models and sophisticated trading instruments like derivatives, but are these the real cause for our economic meltdown? No.
It never seems to occur to the pundits and commentators that our basic economic model is untenable. Capitalism must fail, because it is destroying the planet, with its extractive economies and “consumeritis.” It must fail, because it fosters extremes of wealth and poverty, with its reification of money. It must fail, because it warps our legal system, with its false values and assumptions.
Jesus was quite explicit about the dangers of misplaced values. He reminds us that
“No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money.” (Matt 6:24)
and he alerted us to the spiritual danger that lies in attachment to material “stuff:”
Jesus answered, “If you want to achieve spiritual completeness, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth. Then Jesus said to his disciples, “I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” (Matt. 19:21-24)
Capitalism feeds on the fear, greed and materialism mentioned earlier and so is completely inappropriate for the new world that is aborning. Fortunately, while our economic models run deep in our unconscious worldview, Nature is helping us toward more viable systems through a variety of warnings, e.g. the wealth of storms, fires, floods, earthquakes and forms of pollution we are seeing around us now. The message we are meant to hear? We cannot go on living, working and running our planet as we have been.
Beliefs and Attitudes Around Violence. The final element buried deep in our Western consciousness is what underpins all the above: violence and the “myth of redemptive violence.” For millennia we have lived believing that violence can solve our problems. “Might makes right.” Peace is defined as “the absence of war” —a definition that implies war is the norm, peace something of an aberration. Once upon a time nations felt powerful if they had big armies; these days nations feel powerful if they have “the bomb.” Such madness could realize Jung’s worst nightmare: many parts of the planet devastated and uninhabitable.
Mohandas Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. recognized the truth Jesus taught long ago: that only non-violent actions create genuine solutions to our problems. There is no virtue in fighting, no solace in conflict. Repeatedly Jesus provided examples of his commitment to peace:
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. ...” (Matt. 5:43-44)
“Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword….” (Matt.26:52)
When Jesus’ followers saw what was going to happen, they said, “Lord, should we strike with our swords?” And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear. But Jesus answered, “No more of this!” And he touched the man’s ear and healed him. (Luke 22:49-51)
For all 6 facets of our civilization—power relations, social relations, gender relations, racial and ethnic prejudice, economic injustice and the use of violence—Jesus advocated another way, a way that for 2,000 years has been ignored as millions of people chose to worship Jesus (something he never asked his disciples to do) rather than to follow him (something he repeatedly asked people to do). As we approach 2012 and the “end time” draws near, we can see that Jesus’ vision for the world closely parallels the Hopis’ description of the coming Fifth World with its universal peace, spirit of unity, love and joy.
Jesus and the Hopi give us a sense of what is meant to come into being to replace our stale, outmoded Fourth World. We are left to wonder about the how: How can we get from here to there? Fortunately we have the archetype of the apocalypse to assist us.

The Restoration Process on the Collective Level

In the previous essay I noted how all archetypes have intentionality: They want something to happen. They also have a certain autonomy: they call up behaviors and provoke responses in us. Thanks to Jung, we are able to recognize the archetype of the apocalypse with more conscious awareness than earlier generations had. So we don’t have to stumble through the restoration process in complete ignorance or solely under our own power. We don’t have to reinvent the wheel, and we don’t have to jettison all of the old “wheels” that have carried the old Fourth World this far. Nature and its processes are working with us, and, besides Jung, a variety of visionary thinkers can be our guides.
For example, in dealing with the shift in power relations we have the image of the “partnership model” of Riane Eisler to inspire us. Rather than people dominating and controlling others, Eisler notes how more people these days are waking up to the benefits of collaboration, cooperation and “mutual aid.” We are also seeing more people waking up to the fact that control is an illusion. Buckminster Fuller reminded us years ago that “We are not in control here.” Nature is also helping us, through events like Hurricane Katrina and the California wildfires.
Progressive business leaders like Tom Chappell, Paul Hawken and James Autry advocate the virtues of the “flat organization,” more egalitarian than old-style businesses and far more productive and effective. Such leaders remind us that the game of life is beginning to be played with a whole new set of guidelines and assumptions, replacing the old rules and regulations of the Fourth World). These guidelines are born out of trust, love and compassion and fidelity to our inner guidance. Along with these comes a new concept of “success,” a non-material definition based on alignment with one’s destiny and unique vocation.
Eisler’s “partnership model” envisions a partnership between men and women with full equality of the sexes. In the Fifth World, when all people recognize their unity, inequalities of any kind will be impossible (Does it make any sense to think of your hand as worth less than your foot?). Eisler joins the growing ranks of feminist thinkers calling for the elimination of all stereotypes and limited sex roles that truncate the full humanity of both men and women. As we work our way through the albedo phase of alchemy—holding the tension of opposites—we are slowly integrating the masculine in women and the feminine in men.
Closely linked with the integration of the feminine is environmental protection. Mother and Mother Earth are closely linked in our unconsciousness. How we treat women is paralleled by how we treat the Earth. Just as feminism is helping us toward a restoration of a more appropriate world so environmentalism and Nature’s signs in the form of pollution and species extinction are helping us toward lifestyles more in tune with natural laws and principles.
People seem to be voting with their feet on the issue of overcoming prejudice. There is not much written about this trend (beyond all the hyperbole around the “historic” election of America’s first black president) but we see it in survey results that speak of the growing numbers of people with no affiliation to an organized religion. More people are describing themselves as “spiritual,” rather than religious. Nation states, exclusive clubs, tribes and organized religions are the most divisive forces on the planet, and they will disappear as we work through the apocatastasis in the years ahead.
The scarcity model in our economic thinking will be replaced with an abundance model. Gandhi’s words—“There is sufficiency in the world for man’s need but not for man’s greed” —will be recognized as true: Everyone’s need will be met in the Fifth World. The deep drivers of greed—fear, competition and lust for control—will disappear as the current “leading minority” becomes more of a majority in the coming decades.
Lynn Twist reminds us of the “soul of money” —something all too often forgotten in our contemporary world. The spiritual essence of economic activity will inform our future, as more people recognize their role as co-creators with the Cosmos and put the full range of their talents into service to others. Everyone will do work that they love, and such work will occur within what Herman Daly has called “the steady state model.”
Whereas our current economy is built on a model of constant material growth, the new economic model will encourage constant spiritual, intangible growth. Material growth must be carefully controlled and limited, given that the material resources of the planet are finite. But growth in things like love, peace, joy and creative pursuits (music-making, the arts, poetry etc.) make few demands on the physical systems of Mother Earth and so will be encouraged.
In the steady state model, the mantra is “minimize flow-through, maximize utility.” So we can anticipate that the “4 R’s”—reuse, recycle, recondition and repair —will be keys to our future industrial processes. Even now, in the more progressive areas of the world like Europe, these are becoming more common. Manufacturing will occur with minimal environmental impact and all industrial processes will operate according to the laws of Nature. People will live by “right livelihood” and business organizations will be local and small in scale.
Perhaps the most significant change—one that subsumes all the others—will be the elimination of violence. As more people wake up, there is a growing worldwide movement toward peace. Will enough people come to this pacificist viewpoint in time to avert a global disaster? I don’t know, and Jung’s deathbed vision coupled with the Hopis’ prediction about the end of the United States government make me wonder if we citizens of planet Earth will have to experience some sort of major bellicose disaster before there is a widespread realization that war is just plain stupid, solving nothing and only begetting more violence.
The jury’s out on this question. What we can see going on now that gives me hope is the transformation of the military into a humanitarian organization. When the National Guard is mobilized to help disaster victims, when the United Nations sends in an army of peacekeepers, we are seeing the potential future usefulness of organized, readily mobilized teams of people to offer aid and comfort to others. This is the future face of the military in a pacific world.
As Edward Edinger said in his study of the archetype of the apocalypse, we are already seeing the archetype at work on the collective level. I think it is sparking the visions noted above that many people are offering up to help us have hope and inspiration, and in this way, to ease us into the Fifth World. Jung feared that a global catastrophe would result in “the end of civilization.” Even without a global catastrophe I think we are seeing signs of the end of our old civilization. Forty-eight years of global evolution since Jung’s death in 1961 have seen the rise of feminism, the growth of the global environmental movement, the expansion of the peace movement, more awareness of things like racial profiling, ethnic cleansing and the destructive futility of war—all of these harbingers of the better world to come, all of them indicators of how the archetype is working a transformation.
Growing numbers of indigenous peoples are speaking up and protesting the intrusion of Western civilization. Growing numbers of Western people are waking up to the limitations and negative aspects of our Western “civilized” world. Together native and Western peoples, in their different ways, are calling for a change—a change on a scale and to a degree more massive, deep and pervasive than anything seen in the last 6,000 years. Jung sensed this, when he spoke of our living in a kairos time. He would remind us that it is up to us as to how easily, safely and deliberately we move through this transition time.
We can do better than our current civilization. What we’ve got now is not suited to the reality that is evolving. Nature doesn’t like it. Native peoples see its destructiveness. Jesus points us toward a more viable form of civilization. It is now up to each of us to grow into the challenge of manifesting the new civilization, by taking up our own personal version of the archetype of the apocalypse and experiencing in our individual lives the revivifying impact of the apocatastasis.

Bibliography

Aldrich, Nelson (1988), Old Money: The Mythology of America’s Upper Class. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Allen, David et al. eds. (1980), Whole-Person Medicine. Downers Grove IL: InterVarsity Press.
Autry, James (1991), Love & Profit: The Art of Caring Leadership. New York: William Morrow.
Bacevich, Andrew (2008), The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism. New York: Henry Holt.
Baltzell. E. Digby (1964), The Protestant Establishment: Aristocracy and Caste in America. New York: Random House.
Barrios, Carlos (2009), “The World Will Not End in 2012,” an essay circulated via e-mail February 25, 2009.
Berman, Morris (1981), The Reenchantment of the World. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Berry, Thomas (1988), The Dream of the Earth. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books
Berry, Wendell (1977), The Unsettling of America: Culture and Agriculture. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
Bezold, Clement ed. (1978), Anticipatory Democracy: People in the Politics of the Future. New York: Random House.
Birmingham, Stephen (1968), The Right People. New York: Dell.
Bookchin, Murray (1978), “Towards a Liberatory Technology,” Stepping Stones, ed. Lane De Moll & Gini Coe. New York: Schocken Books.
Borsodi, Ralph (1948), Education and Living. Suffern NY: The School of Living.
Boulding, Elise (1987), “Learning Peace,” Global Peace & Security: Trends and Challenges, ed. Wolfram Hanrieder. Boulder CO: Westview Press.
Carroll, James (1973), “Participatory Technology,” Western Man and Environmental Ethics, ed. Ian Barbour. Menlo Park: Addison Wesley.
Chappell, Tom (1993), The Soul of a Business: Managing for Profit and the Common Good. New York: Bantam Books.
Collard, David (1978), Altruism and Economy: A Study in Non-Selfish Economics. Oxford: Martin Robertson.
Cousins, Norman (1979), Anatomy of an Illness. New York: W.W. Norton.
Daly, Herman (1977), Steady-State Economics: The Economics of Biophysical Equilibrium and Moral Growth. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
________ ed. (1980), Economics, Ecology, Ethics: Essays Toward a Steady-State Economy. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
Daly, Mary (1978), Gyn/ecology: The Metaethics of Radical Feminism. Boston: Beacon Press.
Deming, Barbara (1984), We Are All Part of One Another: A Barbara Deming Reader, ed. Jane Meyerding. Philadelphia: New Society Publishers.
Devall, Bill & George Sessions (1985), Deep Ecology. Salt Lake City: G.M. Smith.
Diamond, Jared (1999), Guns, Germs and Steel. New York: W.W. Norton.
Dorf, Richard & Yvonne Hunter, eds. (1978), Appropriate Visions: Technology, the Environment and the Individual. San Francisco: Boyd & Fraser.
Edinger, Edward (1999), Archetype of the Apocalypse. Chicago & LaSalle IL: Open Court.
Eisler, Riane (1987), The Chalice & The Blade: Our History, Our Future. New York: Harper & Row.
________ (2007), The Real Wealth of Nations. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Ekins, Paul (1986), The Living Economy: A New Economics in the Making. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Elgin, Duane (1981), Voluntary Simplicity: Toward a Way of Life That Is Outwardly Simple, Inwardly Rich. New York: William Morrow.
Elkington, John (1986), “The Sunrise Seven,” The Living Economy, ed. Paul Elkins. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Faludi, Susan (1991), Backlash: The Undeclared War Against American Women. New York: Crown Books.
Ferguson, Kathy (1984), The Feminist Case Against Bureaucracy. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Fox, Matthew (1979), A Spirituality Named Compassion. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
Friedan, Betty (1976), It Changed My Life: Writings on the Women’s Movement. New York: Random House.
Fussell, Paul (1983), Class: A guide Through the American Status System. New York: Summit Books.
Gimbutas, Marija (1977), “The First Wave of Eurasian Steppe Pastoralists into Copper Age Europe,” Journal of Indo-European Studies 5 (Winter 1977).
________ (1982), Goddesses and Gods of Old Europe, 7000-3500 B.C. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Greenleaf, Robert & Larry Spears (2002), Servant Leadership: A Journey Into the Nature of Legitimate Power & Greatness. Mahwah NJ: Paulist Press.
Griffin, Susan (1978), Woman and Nature: The Roaring Inside Her. New York: Harper & Row.
Hannah, Barbara (1976), Jung: His Life and Work. New York: G.P. Putnam.
Harman, Willis (1979), An Incomplete Guide to the Future. New York: W.W. Norton.
________ (1988), Global Mind Change: The Promise of the Last Years of the Twentieth Century. Indianapolis: Knowledge Systems Inc.
Hawken, Paul (1993), The Ecology of Commerce. New York: Harper Business Books.
Hay, Louise (1984), You Can Heal Your Life. Santa Monica CA: Hay House.
Henderson, Hazel (1981), Politics of the Solar Age. Garden City: Doubleday.
Johnson, Warren (1985), The Future Is Not What It Used to Be: Returning to Traditional Values in an Age of Scarcity. New York: Dodd, Mead & Co.
________ (1979), Muddling Toward Frugality. Boulder: Shambhala.
Jung, Carl (1956) “Symbols of Transformation,” Collected Works, 5, 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1971), “Psychological Types,” CW 6. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1966), “Two Essays on Analytical Psychology,” CW 7. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1960), ”The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche,” CW 8. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1959), ”The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious,” CW 9i. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1959), “Aion,” Collected Works, 9ii. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1970), “Civilization in Transition,” CW 10. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1969), “Psychology and Religion: West and East,” CW 11. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1953), “Psychology and Alchemy,” CW 12. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1967), “Alchemical Studies,” CW 13. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1963), “Mysterium Coniunctionis,” CW 14. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1976), ”The Symbolic Life,” CW 18. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Kaplan, Stephen & Rachel (1978), Humanscape: Environments for People. North Scituate MA: Duxbury Press.
Korten, David (2009), Agenda for a New Economy. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Krippner, Stanley (1980), Human Possibilities. Garden City: Doubleday.
Kropotkin, Peter (1972), Mutual Aid: A Factor in Evolution. New York: New York University Press.
Layton, Bentley (1987), The Gnostic Scriptures. Garden City NY: Doubleday & Co.
Leopold, Aldo (1966), A Sand County Almanac. New York: Ballantine.
Lovelock, J.E. (1979), Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lovins, Amory (1978), Soft Energy Paths: Toward a Durable Peace. San Francisco: Friends of the Earth International.
Lutz, Mark & Kenneth Lux (1979), The Challenge of Humanistic Economics. Menlo Park: Benjamin/Cummings Publishing.
Mails, Thomas E., The Hopi Survival Kit. New York: Penguin Compass, 1997.
Mander, Jerry (1991), In the Absence of the Sacred. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
Marine, Gene (1972), A Male Guide to Women’s Liberation. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Maslow, Abraham (1971), The Farther Reaches of Human Nature. Baltimore: Penguin.
Merchant, Carolyn (1980), The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology and the Scientific Revolution. New York: Harper & Row.
Mills, C. Wright (1956), The Power Elite. New York: Oxford University Press.
Moelaert, John (1974), “The Epidemic in Our Midst,” Earthkeeping: Readings in Human Ecology, eds. C. Juzek & S. Mehrtens. Pacific Grove CA: The Boxwood Press.
Mountfield, David (1978), Everyday Life in Elizabethan England. Geneva: Editions Minerva.
Muller, Robert (1982), New Genesis: Shaping a Global Spirituality. New York: Doubleday.
Naess, Arne (1972), The Pluralist and Possibilist Aspect of the Scientific Enterprise. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.
Nearing, Helen & Scott (1970), Living the Good Life: How to Live Sanely and Simply in a Troubled World. New York: Schocken Books.
Needleman, Jacob (1985), The Way of the Physician. New York: Harper & Row.
Nichols, Jack (1975), Men’s Liberation: A New Definition of Masculinity. Baltimore: Penguin Books.
Perkins, John (1994), The World Is As You Dream It. Rochester VT: Destiny Books.
Pitt, D.C. (1988), The Future of the Environment: The Social Dimensions of conservation and Ecological Alternatives. London: Routledge.
Rifkin, Jeremy (1980), Entropy: A New Worldview. New York: Viking Books.
Roszak, Theodore (1979), Person/Planet: The Creative Disintegration of Industrial Society. Garden City: Doubleday.
Rudolph, Kurt (1984), Gnosis: The Nature & History of Gnosticism. New York: Harper & Row.
Russell, Peter (1983), The Global Brain: Speculations on the Evolutionary Leap to Planetary Consciousness. Los Angeles: J.P. Tarcher.
Ryan, M.J. ed. (1998), The Fabric of the Future: Women Visionaries of Today Illuminate the Path to Tomorrow. Berkeley CA: Conari Press.
Sale, Kirkpatrick (1980), Human Scale. New York: Coward, McCann & Geoghegan.
Satin, Mark (1979), New Age Politics: Healing Self & Society. New York: Delta.
Schaef, Anne Wilson (1985), Women’s Reality: An Emerging Female System in a White Male Society. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
Schumacher, E.F. (1973), Small Is Beautiful: Economics As If People Mattered. New York: Harper & Row.
Shames, Richard & Chuck Sterin (1978), Healing with Mind Power. Emmaus PA: Rodale Press.
Singer, Peter (1975), Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for Our Treatment of Animals. New York: Random House.
Smith, John (1992), Women and Doctors. New York: Atlantic Monthly Press.
Sorokin, Pitirim (1950), Explorations in Altruistic Love and Behavior. Boston: Beacon Press.
Stone, Christopher (1975), Should Trees Have Standing? Toward Legal Rights for Natural Objects. New York: Avon Books.
Stone, Merlin (1976), When God Was a Woman. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Twist, Lynn (2003), The Soul of Money: Transforming Your Relationship with Money and Life. New York: W.W. Norton.
Vasconcellos, John (1979), A Liberating Vision: Politics for Growing Humans. San Luis Obispo: Impact Publishers.
Wagner, Suzanne (1998-1999), “A Conversation with Marie-Louise von Franz,” Psychological Perspectives, 38 (Winter 1998-1999), 12-39.
Waring, Marilyn (1988), If Women Counted: A New Feminist Economics. New York: Harper & Row.
Warner, W. Lloyd (1960), Social Class in America: The Evaluation of Status. New York: Harper.
Waters, Frank, Book of the Hopi. New York: Penguin, 1963.
Wink, Walter (1984), Naming the Powers: The Language of Power in the New Testament. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
________ (1986), Unmasking the Powers: The Invisible Forces That Determine Human Existence. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
________ (1992), Engaging the Powers: Discernment and Resistance in a World of Domination. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
________ (1997), When the Powers Fail: Reconciliation in the Healing of Nations. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
________ (1998), The Powers That Be: Theology for a New Millennium. New York: Random House.
________ (2002), The Human Being: Jesus and the Enigma of the Son of the Man. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.




]]> smehrtens info@jungiancenter.org http://jungiancenter.org/blog/blog_comment.asp?bi=37 2009-09-01T12:08:30-05:00 2009-09-01T12:08:30-05:00 2009-09-01T12:08:30-05:00
As we have noted in earlier essays, Jung was very intuitive. Thanks to his keen intuition he was able to sense shifts in the collective consciousness long before outer changes made these shifts obvious to others. One of the shifts he noted was the approach of the end time and the activation of what he called the archetype of the apocalypse. As early as the 1950’s Jung foresaw the approach of the “end time.”
Jung felt it was important for people to know about this archetype because he recognized the power each individual has to change the future. He knew that if enough people become aware of the apocalypse, as an archetype, understand its intentions and internalize its meaning in their own lives, the fate of the world might be more positive. In this essay we are going to discuss briefly the meaning and features of archetypes, with particular attention to the archetype of the apocalypse, and then consider how it relates to the individual and to the collective. We conclude with identifying some of the signs of the approach of the archetype in our world at the moment and Jung’s attitude toward apocalypticists.

The Meaning of “Archetype”

In a paper presented at a London symposium in 1919 Jung used the term “archetype” for the first time, to refer to the
a priori, inborn forms of “intuition,”... which are the necessary a priori determinants of all psychic processes. Just as his instincts compel man to a specifically human mode of existence, so the archetypes force his ways of perception and apprehension into specifically human patterns. The instincts and the archetypes together form the “collective unconscious.”
Earlier in his publications Jung had used the terms “primordial image,” and “the inborn mode of psychic apprehension...”. None of these definitions is likely to illuminate the meaning and value of the notion for the contemporary layperson devoted to Jungiana. So, eager to convey the utility of the concept to their students, later Jungian analysts have elaborated Jung’s definition.
One of the most thorough explications of the concept is found in Anthony Stevens’ Archetype Revisited: An Updated Natural History of the Self. In this revision of his earlier study of the concept, Stevens defines archetypes as
“innate neuropsychic centers possessing the capacity to initiate, control and mediate the common behavioral characteristics and typical experiences of all human beings, irrespective of race, culture or creed.”
What’s this mean? Let’s examine each of the components of this definition.
First of all, archetypes are “innate,” that is, they are part of our psychic makeup, much as our instincts are. We don’t have to learn them or do any sort of conscious work to make them part of our array of human traits: they already are within us, as a form of natural self-organization.
Next, Stevens describes archetypes as “neuropsychic centers.” They are part of our psyche and our nervous system. And they hold potential, i.e. they give rise to patterns of behavior. Archetypes help us to respond in the moment to experiences that arise in life.
One example that I use in my classes which helps students grasp the idea here is the situation where a person is walking along a sidewalk and comes upon a tiny infant all alone and crying. Virtually no one in such a situation would walk on by: It is part of our innate psychic makeup to stop, look around for the parents or caregivers and, if none seem to be present, to try to tend to the infant in some way. Such solicitude reflects the activation of our inner “mother” archetype, which predisposes all human beings to give nurturance, protection and comfort to infants in distress. The caregiving impulse is one pattern of behavior. As Stevens notes in his definition, the archetype “initiates” the behavior. In this case, it is the behavior associated with “mothering.”
A final feature of archetypes is their universal quality. As part of the “collective unconscious” they are common to all persons “regardless of race, culture or creed.” Every human collective has “mother,” “father,” “birth,” “death” etc. in its culture—these are universal features of human existence.
As “active living dispositions... that perform and continually influence our thoughts, feelings and actions,” archetypes are very significant in our lives. But they are not tangible: you cannot see the archetype itself but only the behaviors or patterns of feeling that the archetype gives rise to. Ultimately, Jung realized, archetypes cannot be defined (just as we cannot wrap our minds around the collective unconscious). We can best understand archetypes through our experiences as humans. We can grasp the archetype of “mother” from situations like the above example with the infant on the sidewalk.

Some Features of Archetypes

Several features we have mentioned above: Archetypes are universal and impersonal, as part of the collective unconscious which links us to all of humanity. They are also intangible--non-material--being part of our psychic makeup. We cannot see archetypes with our physical senses unless or until they spark some outer behavior or feeling. And this is another feature: Archetypes are generative, i.e. they spark actions on our part, as we noted in the example above of the “mothering” behavior that arises when we see a vulnerable infant exposed to danger. We don’t have to learn this behavior: It is innately part of our being human.
Archetypes get actualized through our personal experiences in life. In our example, the “mother” archetype gets actualized when we stop and seek help for the infant. The puer archetype is actualized when we spend time at play. The senex archetype shows up when we balance our checkbook and plan our budget for the months ahead. We will discuss how the archetype of the apocalypse shows up later in this essay.
Other features of archetypes are more subtle—their non-locality, for example. Being part of our psychic makeup, archetypes exist outside space and time. A mother’s concern for her child exists regardless of what time it is or where the child is. So it can happen that at 2 o’clock in the morning a mother in Iowa wakes up somehow knowing that her soldier son in Iraq is in some sort of danger, and several hours later she gets a call from the Army that he has been wounded and is being airlifted to the hospital in Germany.
Besides non-locality, archetypes have “a certain autonomy.” By this Jung means that archetypes will operate outside of our ego’s conscious will. In the example above of the infant on the sidewalk, we may be very busy and pressed for time, but even then, we are likely to stop and seek help for the infant. Something in us acts in spite of our desire to get to the meeting on time or to stick to the schedule.
Part of the reason archetypes have autonomy is that they have intentionality: they have a purpose; they call upon us to act in a certain way, to achieve a certain goal. In the example with the “mother” archetype, the intention is to protect the vulnerable new life, to nurture and foster. The “creator” archetype intends for us to bring something new into being. The “teacher” archetype intends for us to transmit our knowledge and wisdom to those receptive to receiving it. The archetype of the apocalypse also has intent, which we will discuss below.
Archetypes have many other features, only two of which we have space to discuss here. The first is their numinosity. Archetypes have a divine quality to them, a power and fascination that derive from their source in the collective unconscious. At times when an archetype motivates us to act we can feel caught up in something larger than ourselves. At such times it is essential that we remember not to identify with the archetype. The ego is not the archetype and can get inflated if it identifies with it. This is important to remember when we consider the archetype of the apocalypse, as we will explain below.
The second feature is the transformative potential archetypes hold. If we recognize and assimilate an archetype, it can change our lives and help us grow in amazing ways. For example, at the Jungian Center now we are seeing lives be enlarged and enriched as people recognize and assimilate the archetype of the creator. Our culture would have us believe that being creative means being gifted with the ability to paint like Picasso or compose like Beethoven. In restricting “creator” to the high arts and masterful performance, our culture has truncated our sense of creativity. But the archetype lives in each one of us and we are being creative in one way or other every day of our lives. Recognizing this and living our creativity consciously expands our reality and enlarges our lives.

The Meaning and Features of the Archetype of the Apocalypse

Before we tackle a definition of the archetype of the apocalypse, we need to understand the meaning of “apocalypse.” It comes from two Greek words, apo and kalypto, which mean “to take away” and “to cover or hide.” So “apocalypse” means literally to “take away the covering of something that has been hidden.” What’s been hidden? The truth, or more specifically, the truth about the future and what is to come. In the New Testament, the final book of the Christian Bible is often referred to the apocalypse or “revelation” given to St. John. John’s visions “took away the cover” of what previously been hidden, to reveal the future end times. Through centuries of Chrisitians’ usage referring to John and his vision the term “apocalypse” has become associated specifically with revelations that envision a “great, final catastrophe” to befall the earth.
Jung regarded apocalypse as an archetype because he recognized that such visions are not limited to Christians: they occur in every culture. Every culture has some sort of belief or account of an “end time” that will be (or has been) revealed. While the specifics vary from culture to culture, there are usually certain basic components of the archetype: Something is revealed about the future; some sort of judgment or evaluation occurs; there is destruction or punishment; and finally there is renewal, in the form of a new reality or world.
The apocalypse archetype shares some features with archetypes in general. It is, for example, what Jung called “preformed.” That is, its general form is already laid down in our unconscious psychic reality. We hear the word “apocalypse” and certain things spring to mind: judgment, destruction, cataclysm, the world not having a very good day! We don’t have to create this reaction; it just arises within us.
The apocalypse archetype is also dynamic: it provokes behaviors, feelings, thoughts and change. For most people who contemplate it, the prospect of apocalypse brings up a host of negative feelings. This is true for most people, but not all. We should note at this point that there are some people now who are actively hoping for the arrival of the apocalypse in a belief that, with the end of the world they will be “raptured” up into Heaven, leaving the “sinners” behind to experience the pain and suffering they deserve. We shall return to this apocalypticist attitude below.
Another key feature of the apocalypse archetype is intent. Like all archetypes, apocalypse is purposive. It wants something to happen. Another way to say this is that it has inherent meaning. It is not simply destructive for the sake of destroying, and this is crucial for us to remember.
What does it want to happen? What meaning might it have? We consider this on two levels: Its intention for us as individuals and what it means for the spiritual seeker; and its intention for the collective, what it means for the world.

How the Archetype of the Apocalypse Relates to the Individual

There are times in the lives of spiritual seekers when dreams arise of global annihilation, wholesale destruction, or interior landscapes of wastelands and wilderness, usually accompanied by feelings of dread, fear, gloom and doom. Sometimes these dreams take the form of images of fire or nuclear explosions, in the alchemical operation known as the calcinatio. At other times dreams show us “holding the tension of the opposites,” enduring the separatio until the transcendent function, or reconciling “third thing” appears. In other dreams we may see our world or situation from a higher perspective, in the sublimatio. Frequently we encounter repellent figures, threatening figures, people not at all like us, as we wrestle with our shadow side. No one who has stayed on the path of deep personal growth has escaped such visions, because the archetype is universal.
Throughout this process we are discomfited, and face a choice: We can resist the work, live in denial and dismiss our dreams as “trivial” or incomprehensible or inconsequential Or we can go with the flow and begin to change. This latter choice is not appealing because it entails allowing the ego to be confronted by the Self. This is not something the ego welcomes. Jung noted that “the experience of the Self is always a defeat for the ego.” The ego doesn’t like facing its own frailty. It wants to think it can run the show and be in control of life. It does not like being forced to confront its limitations. The feelings of anxiety, helplessness, despair and overwhelment that accompany our dreams when the archetype of the apocalypse is activated reflect just how much the ego is out of its depths. A key part of spiritual growth is coming to recognize how limited and inferior the ego is, compared to the wisdom and power of the Self.
When apocalpytic dreams arise spontaneously in our lives, what are we being asked to do? What is the meaning of the archetype for us, as individuals? First, we are being asked to recognize that the Self is coming into conscious realization. When it does, the inner landscape created by the wiles and worries of the ego is threatened, devastated, or shown up as inadequate and limited. We come away from these encounters feeling as if our world has been destroyed. We are being asked to recognize our limitations, see our mistakes, feel the pangs of conscience and come to sense the need to find more authentic and meaningful ways of being. Our world and worldview are shattered and this is precisely what the Self intends.
Only by losing our old world and ways of living can we experience the apocatastasis, the reconstitution or renewal that is at the heart of the archetype of the apocalypse. The Self is ever making “all things new.” It seeks our renewal. It enters consciousness—the world of the ego’s making—and shatters its conventions and images decisively, so as to permit a new inner reality more appropriate to our soul and the spiritual growth we have achieved. When the apocalypse shows up in our dream life, we must transition from our old ways of thinking and being into a more enlarged and authentic way. This process takes time (months, if not years) but the Self is patient. It is implacable, however: While it never lets us down and never lets us go, it also never lets us off! Best not to dig in one’s heels and refuse to cooperate with the Self at such times! Doing so usually forces the archetype to manifest in outer life, and then all manner of unfortunate things show up in life. The Self will not be gainsaid. If we don’t accede to the intentions of the archetype to renew and reconstitute our reality, it will force us to do so through loss of health, job, family, friends, or other painful experiences. While such experiences are terrible to endure, they pale compared to the manifestation of the archetype on the collective level. We consider that level next.

How the Archetype of the Apocalypse Relates to the Collective

On the collective level the archetype of the apocalypse seeks to reorient humanity away from the illusions of a civilization that has grown stale and inappropriate, so as to permit a new, more viable way of life. Since “civilization” is generally something about which we are unconscious, such a reorientation is a painful process, calling into question the host of assumptions we have about reality and how things are. These assumptions can be thought of as “paradigms”—unconscious beliefs, attitudes and mental constructs—that provide the bedrock of how we function in the world. In the next essay I will consider in detail some of these paradigms and how we are being asked to replace them with other models more suited to the next evolutionary stage of humanity as we look toward the future.
The shattering of paradigms is not an easy process. It presents the most severe challenge to life as we know it. We tend to think of Western Civilization as the apogee of human development and we revel in our high technology, sophisticated arts and culture, and the virtues of “modernity.” Rarely do we recognize that, in our lust for scientific progress and ever-more effective forms of control over nature, we have lost all connection to the sacred.
The collective Self is not amused. Nature will not tolerate such abuse much longer. We are seeing more and more evidence of this all over the planet. Just how the archetype of the apocalypse is showing up in our reality now is the subject of the next section of this essay.

Signs of the Archetype of Apocalypse in Our Contemporary Reality

Some signs of the activation of the apocalypse archetype on the collective level are obvious. The rise of apocalyptic cults and sects, like the Branch Davidians and Heaven’s Gate, are two examples of collectives whose leaders came to identify with the archetype and, as a result of their inflation, met their destruction and took all their followers with them. Another obvious sign is the heightening of tensions in international relations, due to the collective projection of the shadow. In this regard, the unconsciousness of global leaders does not help, e.g. George W. Bush’s repeated use of the phrase “axis of evil” to refer to nations he regarded as malevolent. “Bush 43” gave the world numerous examples of projection of the shadow in his profound unconsciousness. A third example of obvious apocalyptic energy is terrorism, reflecting the “invasion of pent-up demonic forces.” Such forces usually get activated in apocalyptic times. In light of our experience of 9/11 few people in the West would hesitate to identify the Islamic jihadists as “demonic.”
Other signs are less obvious. “Holding the tension of opposites” has been showing up collectively around the world in the last few decades: Rwanda, Northern Ireland, Yugoslavia in the 1990’s, Somalia, the Sunnis and Shi’ites in Iraq, the Jews and Palestinians in Gaza are just some of the examples of opposites in confrontation. International politics is full of enemies confronting each other as the opposites that are contained in the Self ask us, collectively, to become and remain conscious of our disparate energies and reconcile our differences.
Another sign is what Jung called the rise of “-isms.” This is a trait of our collective reality that goes back well into the 19th century. Socialism, communism, patriotism, nationalism, colonialism, imperialism—our language is rich in words that reflect our efforts to conceptualize, theorize and reduce individuality to some collective form. Jung found such efforts to depersonalize reality very offensive. Linked to this tendency is the rise of what Oswald Spengler called the “megalopolis,” or giant city—another collective form that loses sight of the individual.
Gigantic cities are possible, in part, because of our technological “advances.” Jung was not uniformly appreciative of modern technologies. He saw in many of them a huge ego inflation. Out of this inflation come our disregard for Nature and the belief that undergirds much of modern scientism: that we can run a viable society in contravention of natural laws. So we see manifold ecological disasters—wildfires, global warming with its rising sea levels and melting glaciers, changes in habitat and insect infestations. A corollary of environmental destruction is the passionate intensity of some environmentalists hoping to save the Earth. Their passion reflects the activation of the apocalypse archetype.
Another sign is the breakdown in the social and political structures that we associate with Western civilization. For example, the media mention these days the phenomenon of the “failed state,” referring to nations whose governments are unable to protect their citizens and provide the basics of safety, security, functioning law courts, markets and other essentials. We also hear analysts decry the “rise of the imperial Presidency,” the collapse of our traditional value system, and, most recently, the failure of free-market capitalism to provide jobs, access to credit and a sense of economic security for the citizens of the world.
In terms of physical health, Edward Edinger cites the AIDS epidemic as another sign of the apocalypse archetype. AIDS is a disease of the immune system; the body has, in effect, failed in its ability to defend its own borders. On a physiological level the epidemic mirrors the collective “invasion” of new elements that are harbingers of a new reality. Our collective mental health also shows signs of the activation of the archetype: inflations are endemic, from our belief in America of our “exceptionalism” to the Islamic jihadists’ belief that theirs is the moral code appropriate for everyone worldwide.
Contrary to the jihadists’ oppression of the feminine (which is part of their reaction to what they consider “modernity”), the West has supported a widening of the range of activities and roles open to women in the last century. In this we are slowly “reclaiming” the feminine. In an earlier essay I noted how this is part of the emerging albedo phase of the process of alchemical change. It is also a part of the apocalypse archetype in that it is opening us to radically new ways of thinking, as we will explore in the next essay on the apocatastasis of Western civilization.
Finally, there are numerous indicators of the activation of the apocalypse archetype in cultural phenomena. From UFO sightings (which Jung wrote about at length) to science fiction, from the best-selling “Left Behind” series of books about the end times to the crude sexuality and pornography on cable television, contemporary culture is full of examples indicative of the degradation characteristic of a civilization in its end stages. It is said that art anticipates the future and I was forcefully struck some years ago when I saw the movie version of Tom Clancy’s The Sum of All Fears, which was one of the first mainstream media events to include the explosion of an atomic bomb. Nuclear explosions are one of the most common features of apocalyptic dreams for persons in whom the apocalypse archetype is active. When such explosions begin to appear in the collective consciousness (i.e. in mainstream media) the student of Jung takes note. Clearly, “the world as we have known it is coming to an end.”

Jung on Apocalypticism

Jung could see the end coming but he was not at all an apocalypticist, nor did he appreciate apocalypticism. An apocalypticist is a person who believes the end is near and looks forward to it for the supposed release it will bring to him and his fellow believers. This anticipation for global annihilation might seem bizarre if you are not familiar with this strain of Christian fundamentalism, but it is commonly heard now, especially in America, where fundamentalists are more vocal than in other parts of the world.
Jung recognized that the archetype of the apocalypse exists and is now active in our collective unconscious. He understood that, because it is an archetype, the apocalypse has a certain fascination for us (because of its numinosity). But he objected to apocalypticism—i.e. to the quest or longing for the end—on several grounds.
First, he objected to Christian fundamentalists’ interpretation of the Biblical books (most notably Daniel and Revelation) in literal terms. Jung understood that these books, with their rich symbolism and metaphors, were to be handled rather like dreams: as symbolic accounts. They are not describing literal events that are to occur but are providing us with metaphoric images related to inner psychic states of being.
Second, he recognized that Christian fundamentalists operate with a truncated view of the Divine, i.e. that God is all good and that Satan is a force opposed to God and must be vanquished. Jung saw the Divine as All That Is, meaning that the Divine includes the bad and the good, and an encounter with the Divine is our opportunity to integrate the shadow, so as to enlarge our being and increase our capacity for compassion.
Finally, Jung was appalled at the fundamentalists’ eager anticipation of the destruction of Earth and all the life on it. Jung worked always and tirelessly to heal the world, to foster peace and to reconcile conflict. Toward that end he urged individuals to do their inner work, in the knowledge that all real change—change that transforms reality at a fundamental level—starts with and depends on individuals, you and me. Jung would say to us that, if we want to avert global catastrophe, if we want to seize the opportunity that the archetype of the apocalypse is now holding out to us, we must step up to the plate and do our inner work. Wise up to and integrate our shadow. Recognize our inner partner, the animus or anima. Subordinate the ego to our Divine core, the Self. Only by such individual efforts will we be able to utilize this apocalyptic archetype to turn our civilization into something more supportive of the fullness of our human potential. Just what that more supportive civilization would look like is the subject of the next essay.

Bibliography

Bacevich, Andrew (2008), The Limits of Power. New York: Henry Holt.
Barker, Joel Arther (1992), Paradigms: The Business of Discovering the Future. New York: Harper Business Books.
Edinger, Edward (1985), Anatomy of the Psyche: Alchemical Symbolism in Psychotherapy. Chicago & LaSalle IL: Open Court.
________ (1999), Archetype of the Apocalypse. Chicago & LaSalle IL: Open Court.
Ehrman, Bart (1999), Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium. New York: Oxford University Press.
Griffin, David (1996), “A Post-Modern Science,” Revisioning Science: Essays Toward a New Knowledge Base for Our Culture, ed. S. Mehrtens. Waterbury VT: Potlatch Press.
Hannah, Barbara (1976), Jung: His Life and Work. New York: G.P. Putnam.
Jung, Carl (1956) “Symbols of Transformation,” Collected Works, 5, 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1971), “Psychological Types,” CW 6. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1966), “Two Essays on Analytical Psychology,” CW 7. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1960), ”The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche,” CW 8. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1959), ”The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious,” CW 9i. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1959), “Aion,” Collected Works, 9ii. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1970), “Civilization in Transition,” CW 10. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1969), “Psychology and Religion: West and East,” CW 11. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1953), “Psychology and Alchemy,” CW 12. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1967), “Alchemical Studies,” CW 13. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1963), “Mysterium Coniunctionis,” CW 14. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1976), ”The Symbolic Life,” CW 18. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Kuhn, Thomas (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd ed. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
LaHaye, Tim & Jerry Jenkins (1995), Left Behind: A Novel of the Earth’s Last Days. Wheaton IL: Tyndale House.
________ (1996), Tribulation Force: The Continuing Drama of Those Left Behind. Wheaton IL: Tyndale House.
________ (1997), Nicolae: The Rise of Antichrist. Wheaton IL: Tyndale House.
________ (1998), Soul Harvest: The World Takes Sides. Wheaton IL: Tyndale House.
________ (1999a), Apollyon: The Destroyer Unleashed. Wheaton IL: Tyndale House.
________ (1999b), Assassins. Wheaton IL: Tyndale House.
________ (2000a), The Indwelling: The Beast Takes Possession. Wheaton IL: Tyndale House.
________ (2000b), The Mark: The Beast Rules the World. Wheaton IL: Tyndale House.
________ (2001), Desecration: Antichrist Takes the Throne. Wheaton IL: Tyndale House.
________ (2002), The Remnant: On the Brink of Armageddon. Wheaton IL: Tyndale House.
________ (2003), Armageddon. Wheaton IL: Tyndale House.
________ (2004), Glorious Appearing: The End of Days. Wheaton IL: Tyndale House.
________ (2005a), The Rising: Antichrist Is Born. Wheaton IL: Tyndale House.
________ (2005b), The Regime: Evil Advances. Wheaton IL: Tyndale House.
________ (2006), The Rapture: In the Twinkling of an Eye—Countdown to Earth’s Last Days. Wheaton IL: Tyndale House.
________ (2007), Kingdom Come: The Final Victory. Wheaton IL: Tyndale House.
Mander, Jerry (1991), In the Absence of the Sacred. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
O’Connor, Peter (1985), Understanding Jung, Understanding Yourself. London: Metheun.
Stevens, Anthony (1982), Archetypes: A Natural History of the Self. Toronto: Inner City Books.
________ (2003), Archetype Revisited: An Updated Natural History of the Self. Toronto: Inner City Books.


]]> Susan Mehrtens info@jungiancenter.org http://jungiancenter.org/blog/blog_comment.asp?bi=36 2009-08-03T09:43:57-05:00 2009-08-03T09:43:57-05:00 2009-08-03T09:43:57-05:00 “Holding the Tension of the Opposites”

The last fifteen years of Carl Jung’s life were lived against the backdrop of the Cold War—that time in our global history when most of the nations of the world were aligned either with the “West” or with the “Communist bloc.” Intermittently throughout this time the people of the world held their breath as they watched confrontations between the United States and the Soviet Union heat up. During one such tense time members of the Psychological Club in Zurich asked Jung if he thought there would be an atomic war. Barbara Hannah recalled his reply:
“I think it depends on how many people can stand the tension of the opposites in themselves. If enough can do so, I think the situation will just hold, and we shall be able to creep around innumerable threats and thus avoid the worst catastrophe of all: the final clash of opposites in an atomic war. But if there are not enough and such a war should break out, I am afraid it would inevitably mean the end of our civilization as so many civilizations have ended in the past but on a smaller scale.”
In the 1950’s the “opposites” globally were the capitalist West and the communist East, the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. The latter collapsed in 1989, seemingly leaving the United States as the undisputed leader of the world. But a nation as unconscious as the U.S. cannot exist for long without some external threat carrying its shadow, and it didn’t take more than a few years before another “opposite” emerged. What replaced Communism as our “opposite”?
Consider the major features of American society: We are a liberal, secular, ethnically diverse and pluralistic culture. We espouse democratic ideals and are progressive in the sense that we expect the future to be better than the past. We cherish free-market capitalism, an economic orientation well-suited to our materialistic bent. Many of our citizens enjoy high-tech forms of entertainment and urbane activities in a cultural milieu of moral debauchery.
The opposite of our society would be a culture that is illiberal, intolerant of diversity, theocratic and tribal. It would reject democracy and be oriented to the past, to traditions and history, rather than to the future. Such a culture would regard “progress” as a threat to its heritage, and would reject both capitalism and the materialism on which capitalism is built. It would be regressive, fanatically religious, dogmatic in its beliefs and rural in its orientation. Its citizens would live under a moral code that seems (to the “modern” West) almost medieval.
Do we see such an opposite in our world today? Clearly, the Islamic jihadists and, in particular, the Taliban, are just such a society. And, given their commitment to a bogus interpretation of jihad, they are eager to confront the United States. Since 1993 the world has witnessed increasingly destructive examples of the “clash of opposites” that Jung feared: the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center; the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Africa; the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon; the 2002 bombing of the nightclub in Bali; the 2004 railroad bombing in Madrid; and the 2005 bombing of the tube and buses in London.
In multiple messages the late Ayatollah Khomeini made it clear that he viewed the United States as the “Great Satan” and Osama bin Laden has demanded that we convert to Islam, give up our military bases in the Middle East, and change our way of life to conform to Islamic values. In this he is reflecting a deeper “opposite,” that is, a more fundamental clash of opposites, in what has been called the “clash of fundamentalisms.” Both Christianity and Islam lay claim to having the Truth. Each insists only its way is the right way. In an earlier essay I defined “cosmic vanity.” This idea that one religion is the sole proponent of truth is cosmic vanity. This way of thinking was the ideological basis for the crusades back in the Middle Ages. It comes as a shock to most Western people to learn that Osama and the jihadists are still operating with this medieval mindset and in their minds they have taken up the efforts to conquer the “infidel” that went on for over a thousand years.
In the essay on America’s shadow I noted how the United States is so strongly an ESTJ culture, Extraverted (oriented to the outer world), Sensate (focused on tangible, material things), Thinking (preferring rational argument and objective facts to feelings and subjective values), and Judging (liking closure, decisive leadership and rapid decision-making). Such a strong bias does not conduce toward introspection and reflection, so it is not surprising that we have to see our inner opposite “out there,” in outer reality, rather than recognizing it within ourselves. We are now facing our unconscious in our current confrontation with the Islamic jihadists, who are carrying the projection of our societal shadow. Failing to hold Jung’s “tension of opposites” within ourselves, we are forced to experience it in outer reality.
Given the fanaticism of the jihadists and the profundity of our Western unconsciousness, this projection presents us with the gravest of problems. Jung offers us some advice in this impasse:
“...I had learned that all the greatest and most important problems of life are fundamentally insoluble.... They can never be solved, but only outgrown.”
Our current situation globally is not a problem to be “solved” with logic, reason, computer programs and other forms of left-brained processing. We are here dealing with a situation we must outgrow. The ego mind does not have the answers here. We can’t use our conscious mind to figure out what to do. Neither the predominance of our Thinking function, nor our Extraverted bias will be useful in dealing with our current challenges. “Outgrowing” our current challenges requires not cogitation but reflection, introspection and conscientious inner work.
On the individual level, we each must “stand the tension of opposites” in ourselves. Each of us is being asked by the realities of our world to take up the task of integrating the shadow, and it is not an easy task, for it requires engagement with the unconscious. The Extraversion that is so prevalent in America tends to ignore the unconscious and, indeed, anything having to do with inner life. So we can’t expect a majority of people to jump into this task; we’ll be fortunate if even a very small minority of people confront their shadow side, with its dogmatism, intolerance, regressive tendencies, judgmentalism, self-righteousness and insecurity.
Jung never expected the majority of people to “get with his program.” All he hoped for was “enough,” what he called a “leading minority.” If “enough can stand the tension of the opposites in themselves” we just might be able to “creep around the innumerable threats” and avoid global catastrophe. Are “enough” people doing the inner work? Is the “critical mass” growing to the point that we will be able to stave off the “end of civilization” that Jung feared would result if we failed? We don’t know. But this question—without an answer—should motivate each of us to continue our inner work all the more conscientiously.
While we work all the more diligently on ourselves, we must consider some hypothetical potentialities in this challenging time. Suppose the Taliban take over Pakistan with its 100+ nuclear bombs. Suppose AIPAC were to exert its considerable political influence on the U.S. government to defend Israel at all costs. Suppose a consortium of Christian fundamentalists, apocalypticists, super-patriots and politicians stupid enough to think a war could help pull us out of our economic doldrums coalesced and pressured the United States to get more deeply involved in Middle East politics. Suppose all these or similar nightmares came to pass and we, the people of planet Earth, failed to avoid “the final clash of opposites in an atomic war.” What then?
In his deathbed vision Jung himself envisioned large areas of the Earth completely devastated. If the confrontation with the jihadists took an atomic form, we might expect to see whole regions rendered uninhabitable due to radiation pollution. People, animals, vegetation, even the delicate ecological balances that sustain life—all would die. There would be a massive experience of death, the alchemical mortificatio.
We are currently living in a world in transition. The tenth volume of Jung’s Collected Works has the title “Civilization in Transition,” reflecting Jung’s recognition of this fact. Part of the process of transition is the mortificatio, when something dies. In his alchemical studies Jung recognized how essential the mortificatio phase is in any process of transformation: things have to die, so as to allow space for new things to emerge. On a global scale we may perhaps be approaching a mortificatio phase, when the old form of “civilization” as we have known it will end.
Something as long-lived, as cherished and as globally pervasive as our current civilization cannot be transformed without some major events that instigate the process. Jung clearly did not regard such an eventuality as a positive, but we might contemplate the prospect from a different vantage point, drawing on the work of many people who, over the last several decades, have been envisioning new possibilities for planetary existence —possibilities that require a clearing out of old ways, old habit patterns, and old assumptions about reality. What needs to be cleared out? And what sort of civilization might come into being? We consider these questions in a later essay. First, we need to consider the archetype that might clear the way for a new form of civilization to emerge. This is the archetype of the apocalypse.

Bibliography

Ali, Tariq (2002), The Clash of Fundamentalisms: Crusades, Jihads and Modernity. New York: Verso.
Allen, David et al. eds. (1980), Whole-Person Medicine. Downers Grove IL: InterVarsity Press.
Berman, Morris (1981), The Reenchantment of the World. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Berry, Thomas (1988), The Dream of the Earth. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books
Berry, Wendell (1977), The Unsettling of America: Culture and Agriculture. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
Bezold, Clement ed. (1978), Anticipatory Democracy: People in the Politics of the Future. New York: Random House.
Birmingham, Stephen (1968), The Right People. New York: Dell.
Bookchin, Murray (1978), “Towards a Liberatory Technology,” Stepping Stones, ed. Lane De Moll & Gini Coe. New York: Schocken Books.
Borsodi, Ralph (1948), Education and Living. Suffern NY: The School of Living.
Boulding, Elise (1987), “Learning Peace,” Global Peace & Security: Trends and Challenges, ed. Wolfram Hanrieder. Boulder CO: Westview Press.
Carroll, James (1973), “Participatory Technology,” Western Man and Environmental Ethics, ed. Ian Barbour. Menlo Park: Addison Wesley.
Chappell, Tom (1993), The Soul of a Business: Managing for Profit and the Common Good. New York: Bantam Books.
Collard, David (1978), Altruism and Economy: A Study in Non-Selfish Economics. Oxford: Martin Robertson.
Cousins, Norman (1979), Anatomy of an Illness. New York: W.W. Norton.
Daly, Herman (1977), Steady-State Economics: The Economics of Biophysical Equilibrium and Moral Growth. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
________ ed. (1980), Economics, Ecology, Ethics: Essays Toward a Steady-State Economy. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
Daly, Mary (1978), Gyn/ecology: The Metaethics of Radical Feminism. Boston: Beacon Press.
Deming, Barbara (1984), We Are All Part of One Another: A Barbara Deming Reader, ed. Jane Meyerding. Philadelphia: New Society Publishers.
Devall, Bill & George Sessions (1985), Deep Ecology. Salt Lake City: G.M. Smith.
Dorf, Richard & Yvonne Hunter, eds. (1978), Appropriate Visions: Technology, the Environment and the Individual. San Francisco: Boyd & Fraser.
Eisler, Riane (1987), The Chalice & The Blade: Our History, Our Future. New York: Harper & Row.
________ (2007), The Real Wealth of Nations. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Ekins, Paul (1986), The Living Economy: A New Economics in the Making. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Elgin, Duane (1981), Voluntary Simplicity: Toward a Way of Life That Is Outwardly Simple, Inwardly Rich. New York: William Morrow.
Elkington, John (1986), “The Sunrise Seven,” The Living Economy, ed. Paul Elkins. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Ferguson, Kathy (1984), The Feminist Case Against Bureaucracy. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Fisk, Robert (2007), The Great War for Civilization: The Conquest of the Middle East. New York: Random House.
Fox, Matthew (1979), A Spirituality Named Compassion. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
Friedman, Thomas (1995), From Beirut to Jerusalem. New York: Random House.
Greenleaf, Robert & Larry Spears (2002), Servant Leadership: A Journey Into the Nature of Legitimate Power & Greatness. Mahwah NJ: Paulist Press.
Hannah, Barbara (1976), Jung: His Life and Work. New York: G.P. Putnam.
Harman, Willis (1979), An Incomplete Guide to the Future. New York: W.W. Norton.
________ (1988), Global Mind Change: The Promise of the Last Years of the Twentieth Century. Indianapolis: Knowledge Systems Inc.
Hawken, Paul (1993), The Ecology of Commerce. New York: Harper Business Books.
Hay, Louise (1984), You Can Heal Your Life. Santa Monica CA: Hay House.
Henderson, Hazel (1981), Politics of the Solar Age. Garden City: Doubleday.
Johnson, Warren (1985), The Future Is Not What It Used to Be: Returning to Traditional Values in an Age of Scarcity. New York: Dodd, Mead & Co.
________ (1979), Muddling Toward Frugality. Boulder: Shambhala.
Jung, Carl (1967), “Alchemical Studies,” CW 13. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1976), ”The Symbolic Life,” CW 18. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Kaplan, Stephen & Rachel (1978), Humanscape: Environments for People. North Scituate MA: Duxbury Press.
Korten, David (2009), Agenda for a New Economy. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Krippner, Stanley (1980), Human Possibilities. Garden City: Doubleday.
Kropotkin, Peter (1972), Mutual Aid: A Factor in Evolution. New York: New York University Press.
Leopold, Aldo (1966), A Sand County Almanac. New York: Ballantine.
Lewis, Bernard (2002), What Went Wrong? The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East. New York: Harper.
________ (2003), The Crisis of Islam: Holy War and Unholy Terror. New York: Random House.
Lovelock, J.E. (1979), Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lovins, Amory (1978), Soft Energy Paths: Toward a Durable Peace. San Francisco: Friends of the Earth International.
Lutz, Mark & Kenneth Lux (1979), The Challenge of Humanistic Economics. Menlo Park: Benjamin/Cummings Publishing.
Mails, Thomas E., The Hopi Survival Kit. New York: Penguin Compass, 1997.
Mander, Jerry (1991), In the Absence of the Sacred. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
Maslow, Abraham (1971), The Farther Reaches of Human Nature. Baltimore: Penguin.
Moelaert, John (1974), “The Epidemic in Our Midst,” Earthkeeping: Readings in Human Ecology, eds. C. Juzek & S. Mehrtens. Pacific Grove CA: The Boxwood Press.
Muller, Robert (1982), New Genesis: Shaping a Global Spirituality. New York: Doubleday.
Naess, Arne (1972), The Pluralist and Possibilist Aspect of the Scientific Enterprise. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.
Nearing, Helen & Scott (1970), Living the Good Life: How to Live Sanely and Simply in a Troubled World. New York: Schocken Books.
Needleman, Jacob (1985), The Way of the Physician. New York: Harper & Row.
Nisbet, Robert (1980), History of the Idea of Progress. New York: Basic Books.
Patai, Raphael (2007), The Arab Mind. New York: Hatherleigh Press.
Perkins, John (1994), The World Is As You Dream It. Rochester VT: Destiny Books.
Pitt, D.C. (1988), The Future of the Environment: The Social Dimensions of conservation and Ecological Alternatives. London: Routledge.
Rifkin, Jeremy (1980), Entropy: A New Worldview. New York: Viking Books.
Roszak, Theodore (1979), Person/Planet: The Creative Disintegration of Industrial Society. Garden City: Doubleday.
Russell, Peter (1983), The Global Brain: Speculations on the Evolutionary Leap to Planetary Consciousness. Los Angeles: J.P. Tarcher.
Ryan, M.J. ed. (1998), The Fabric of the Future: Women Visionaries of Today Illuminate the Path to Tomorrow. Berkeley CA: Conari Press.
Sale, Kirkpatrick (1980), Human Scale. New York: Coward, McCann & Geoghegan.
Satin, Mark (1979), New Age Politics: Healing Self & Society. New York: Delta.
Schaef, Anne Wilson (1985), Women’s Reality: An Emerging Female System in a White Male Society. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
Schumacher, E.F. (1973), Small Is Beautiful: Economics As If People Mattered. New York: Harper & Row.
Shames, Richard & Chuck Sterin (1978), Healing with Mind Power. Emmaus PA: Rodale Press.
Singer, Peter (1975), Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for Our Treatment of Animals. New York: Random House.
Sorokin, Pitirim (1950), Explorations in Altruistic Love and Behavior. Boston: Beacon Press.
Stone, Christopher (1975), Should Trees Have Standing? Toward Legal Rights for Natural Objects. New York: Avon Books.
Twist, Lynn (2003), The Soul of Money: Transforming Your Relationship with Money and Life. New York: W.W. Norton.
Vasconcellos, John (1979), A Liberating Vision: Politics for Growing Humans. San Luis Obispo: Impact Publishers.
Waring, Marilyn (1988), If Women Counted: A New Feminist Economics. New York: Harper & Row.


]]> admin smehrtens@potlatchgroup.com http://jungiancenter.org/blog/blog_comment.asp?bi=35 2009-07-06T09:50:00-05:00 2009-07-06T09:50:00-05:00 2009-07-06T09:50:00-05:00
Sometimes, in reading Jung, I encounter a passage that makes me think Jung wrote it just yesterday. Recently, while preparing a presentation for the Jung Society for Scholarly Studies symposium at Cornell University, I came across the following quote from “Civilization in Transition:”
Thanks to industrialization, large portions of the population were uprooted and were herded together in large centers. This new form of existence—with its mass psychology and social dependence on the fluctuation of markets and wages—produced an individual who was unstable, insecure, and suggestible. He was aware that his life depended on boards of directors and captains of industry, and he supposed, rightly or wrongly, that they were chiefly motivated by financial interests. He knew that, no matter how conscientiously he worked, he could still fall a victim at any moment to economic changes which were utterly beyond his control. And there was nothing else for him to rely on....
Jung wrote these words for a BBC broadcast he gave in 1946, but, given our recent history, they seem as relevant in 2009 as they were 63 years ago. How prescient Jung was! He could see the fragility of the industrial system and how vulnerable it has left the vast majority of people in the modern world.
Ever the clinician concerned to relieve suffering in the world, Jung was not content simply to diagnose problems; he offered suggestions as to what we might do to improve our situation. Some of these suggestions include wising up to the dangerous features of our current reality, addressing the problem of “mass-mindedness,” and achieving a metanoia, or fundamental mind change.

Wising Up to the Dangerous Features of Our Current Reality

Jung summarized many of what he felt were dangerous features of Western civilization in the above passage. In the manner of the French explication de texte, let’s draw out Jung’s wisdom phrase by phrase.
“Large portions of the population were uprooted...”: Jung regarded the rootlessness of modern people as “one of the greatest psychic dangers... a disaster not only for primitive tribes but for civilized man as well.” Why a disaster? Jung felt rootlessness would lead to “... a hybris of the conscious mind which manifests itself in the form of exaggerated self-esteem or an inferiority complex. At all events a loss of balance ensues, and this is the most fruitful soil for psychic injury.”
“herded together in large centers.”: Jung refers here to big cities, the megalopolises of the modern world, and he felt such “herding” of people caused all sorts of social and mental pathologies, a tendency to “thinking in large numbers” and the rise of “mass psychology” —all regrettable and dangerous features of modern life.
“...dependence on the fluctuation of markets and wages”: Jung recognized that we have become so dependent because of the “externalization of culture” —the result of the Extraverted bias of Western culture (most especially in America). Our “materialistic technology and commercial acquisitiveness” has led to “a loss of spiritual culture.” Jung was quite explicit about the dangers in such dependence on externals:
The man whose interests are all outside is never satisfied with what is necessary, but is perpetually hankering after something more and better which, true to his bias, he always seeks outside himself. He forgets completely that, for all his outward successes, he himself remains the same inwardly, and he therefore laments his poverty if he possesses only one automobile when the majority have two. Obviously the outward lives of men could do with a lot more bettering and beautifying, but these things lose their meaning when the inner man does not keep pace with them. To be satisfied with “necessities” is no doubt an inestimable source of happiness, yet the inner man continues to raise his claim, and this can be satisfied by no outward possession. And the less this voice is heard in the chase after the brilliant things of this world, the more the inner man becomes the source of inexplicable misfortune and uncomprehended unhappiness in the midst of living conditions whose outcome was expected to be entirely different. The externalization of life turns to incurable suffering, because no one can understand why he should suffer from himself. No one wonders at his insatiability, but regards it as his lawful right, never thinking that the one-sidedness of this psychic diet leads in the end to the gravest disturbances of equilibrium. That is the sickness of Western man, and he will not rest until he has infected the whole world with his own greedy restlessness.
The economic meltdown of 2008 brought home the truth of Jung’s insight: the “captains of industry” (most of them in the United States), “chiefly motivated by financial interests” did indeed “infect” the entire planet with their greedy materialism.
One concomitant of such materialism is “... the spiritual confusion of our modern world.” Another has been “the hollowing out of money, which in the near future will make all savings illusory...” . A third is the emptiness of Western materialistic values, which has led to the degeneration of the individual personality. Jung speaks to this in his reference to
“... an individual who was unstable, insecure and suggestible.”: Our Western over-valuation of logic, reason and science is both a result of and a further cause for our lack of self-knowledge and valuation of the inner man. We put great store on being “with it,” following fads and fashions with increasing susceptibility to the omnipresent influence of the media. Lacking inner anchors, we become more and more suggestible, especially as our cities get larger and larger: “The majority of normal people (quite apart from the 10 per cent or so who are inferior) are ridiculously unconscious and naive and are open to any passing suggestion.... The more people live together in heaps, the stupider and more suggestible the individual becomes.”
“...he could still fall victim at any moment to economic changes which were utterly beyond his control.”: Jung noted elsewhere “the longing for security in an age of insecurity.” Being “cogs in the wheel” of the industrialized world model, we feel disempowered, which is the essence of the “victim” archetype.
“And there was nothing else for him to rely on.”: In our world “full of trouble and disorientation,” “confusion and disintegration,” “uneasiness and fear,” we are without firm defenses. Jung felt this was in part due to “current trends in education that foster mass thinking and a collective orientation.” This was one of Jung’s major bugaboos, another key feature of our time and a theme Jung stressed over and over as a major danger we had to recognize and address.

Addressing the Problem of “Mass-Mindedness”

Jung regarded “mass-mindedness” as a danger, and mass psychology as a “dangerous germ.” Why? What’s so dangerous about large groups and crowds?
Jung felt crowds let loose “the dynamisms of the collective man... beasts or demons that lie dormant in every person until he is part of a mob.” Large groups blot out individual morality and cause individuals’ consciousness to sink to a lower level. Crowds stir up fears, which can lead to a whole population having “...a feeling of catastrophe in the air.” Crowds and groups induce “infantile behavior” in people who would otherwise behave in mature and responsible ways. Crowds cause “even the best man to lose his value and meaning,” and lead individuals to become “stultified” and their personalities to “degenerate.” Lacking any self-reflection, large groups of people make individuals “psychically abnormal.” Moved by impersonal, overwhelming forces, mobs produce “herd psychology” and the “mass man.”
Jung repeatedly decried the rise of “mass man.” Such a person is infantile in his behavior, “unreasonable, irresponsible, emotional, erratic and unreliable.” In the mass, the individual looses his value and becomes the victims of “-isms.” Claiming no sense of responsibility for his actions, mass man finds it easy to commit appalling crimes without thinking, and grows increasingly dependent on the state.
Jung felt that the larger the size of the group, the greater the dangers, because the lower the overall level of consciousness. The individual thrust into a large crowd would be hard put indeed to resist the pull into unconsciousness and would soon manifest “psychic abnormality.” Jung saw all this play out in the atrocities of World Wars I and II. He would not be surprised by similar events in the Iran-Iraq war, the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, and in the current “war” on terrorism.
Resisting mass-mindedness is not easy, but Jung provided us with some suggestions on how to do it. First, we must give up belief in “the sovereign remedy of mass action.” How tempting it is to focus on outer change, to reform what’s “out there”, to seek mass change! Jung would have none of that. He urges us not to depend on groups or large organizations, and most especially, not to look to the state or nation for our deliverance, since this only fosters more mass-mindedness. Rather we must resist trying any collective measures.
Second, he suggests we work to break up large organizations that “eat away at the individual’s nature.” How to do this? Jung is not specific but a simple personal response would be to refuse to join forces with such organizations: take work in small companies, join local groups (which may be affiliated with national or international groups), be self-employed. Support local businesses (most of which are smaller in size that the “big box” retailers and chains). Participate in organizations that understand the value of smallness, like the Jungian Center. We recognize the truth of Jung’s words here and put a premium on smallness. “Small is beautiful” is one of the Center’s stated values.
Most important in resisting mass-mindedness is the re-valuation of the individual. Jung urges us to emphasize and increase the value of the individual person. The individual life is the essential thing, Jung tells us. The salvation of the world lies in the salvation of the individual. We must recognize the whole man and begin with healing ourselves if we wish to heal the world.
To do this, of course, prompts a fourth suggestion Jung makes: work for a fundamental metanoia, or change of consciousness. What does Jung mean by this, and how might we go about achieving it?

Achieving a Metanoia

In this context, metanoia means for Jung changing our focus, our attitude and our values. In terms of our focus, we must shift from a focus on externals—on what’s out there—to a focus on internals—what’s going on inside me. Given the extraverted bias of American culture (with 75% of Americans being Extraverts, in the Jungian typology), this is not something that will come naturally. Most people will have to make a conscious effort to achieve this shift.
The external world does not hold the solution, since anything external is vulnerable to loss. Jesus reminds us of this in his admonition:
“Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.” (Matt 6:19-21)
Jung knew what Jesus meant by “treasures in heaven.” These are the eternal spiritual truths that lie rooted in the world within us. These include our awareness of the reality of the psyche and its wisdom; our recognizing that the psyche is real, wise, powerful and the source of our being. Jung went so far as to proclaim that “the psyche is the indispensable instrument in the reorganization of a civilized community.”
In terms of our attitude, we have to transform our stress on materialism and matter to one stressing intangibles and things of the spirit. Again, given the bias toward Sensation in American culture (with three-quarters of all Americans being Sensates, in the Jungian typology), this will not be an easy shift to make. But it is an essential shift because it fosters the discovery of our inner life, the reality of the psyche and the valuation of intuition.
In terms of our values, we have to give up the belief that “bigger is better.” Mass action is not the solution. State action is not the solution. Collective action is not the solution to what really ails our world, as we noted above, in the discussion of Jung’s warnings against mass-mindedness.
How to achieve the metanoia Jung calls for? One of the best ways, Jung felt, is working with dreams. A regular, disciplined dream work practice provides us with the necessary personal experience of our soul’s guidance, care, direction and love for us. This is the source of true stability and security, a “treasure” that can’t rust, be eaten or stolen from us. By internalizing a locus of security for ourselves we become psychologically free of dependence on externals, like those boards of directors and captains of industry and whatever antics, crimes or sins they may commit.
The regular practice of working with our dreams allows us to discover our inner life, and this discovery is a major counterweight to the materialism of our culture. When we watch the psyche’s creativity and insight unfold for us every night in our dreams no longer can we believe that matter is all there is in life. Nor can we remain as we were: we grow, we “individuate.”
An active dream practice also helps us to lead the “responsible life” that Jung saw as a consequence of individuation. As we become more and more who we truly are, in the process of individuation, we become more and more conscious of our duties to our community. The process, in other words, does not take us into isolation or estrangement from society, but rather makes us aware of how we all are one, in complex webs of interdependence.

Conclusion

There may be changes underway now in our global reality that seem far beyond our power as individuals to control or even to influence. But this does not mean that we should see ourselves as victims. Nor should we feel there is nothing for us to rely on.
Jung urges us to remember that we can rely on the psyche, our soul, our inner life, our inner guidance. We have within us what we need to feel safe, to prepare for whatever the future may bring, to thrive in the years ahead. The answers we need to the questions we have are not to be found without, in other people or the busy-ness and diversions of our society. Rather, our answers lie within. As Jung said, “Your vision will become clear only when you can look into your own heart. Who looks outside, dreams; who looks inside, awakes.”
The critical challenges of our time require us to be awake, to become conscious of the unconscious, to plumb the depths of our own hearts and to take the full measure of our being (which is always far, far more than what the ego mind thinks it is). We must turn to our inner wisdom, not to outside “experts.” In these times of widespread confusion and anxiety, it is not for us to be left feeling like Jung’s description of modern man, with “nothing left for him to rely on....”. The psyche is real. Your soul is real. You can rely on it. This is Jung’s great message for us in this challenging time.

Bibliography

Jung, Carl, (1960), ”The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche,” CW 8. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1959), ”The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious,” CW 9i. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1959), “Aion,” Collected Works, 9ii. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1970), “Civilization in Transition,” CW 10. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1969), “Psychology and Religion: West and East,” CW 11. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1954), “The Practice of Psychotherapy,” CW 16. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1976), ”The Symbolic Life,” CW 18. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Keirsey, David & Marilyn Bates (1984), Please Understand Me. Del Mar CA: Prometheus Nemesis Books.
Schumacher, E.F. (1973), Small Is Beautiful: Economics As If People Mattered. New York: Harper & Row.
Tart, Charles (1987), Waking Up: Overcoming the Obstacles to Human Potential. Boston: Shambhala.



]]> admin webmaster@yourdomain.com http://jungiancenter.org/blog/blog_comment.asp?bi=34 2009-06-01T08:01:53-05:00 2009-06-01T08:01:53-05:00 2009-06-01T08:01:53-05:00
This is the final of three essays that focus on America and its current situation from a Jungian perspective. In this last in the series the subject is, as noted in the final sentence of the previous essay, “the size, cause, nature and deep background of the coming American catastrophe.” Since the “deep background” requires more explanation and elaboration we’ll consider that first.

The Law of Cause and Effect: The Deep Background to America’s Current Situation

If we want to understand the deep background of what is going on now in America, we have to consider several key concepts. The first of these is the principle of karma. Theosophy and Eastern religions like Buddhism consider karma to be part of the Law of Cause and Effect. The Dalai Lama has provided a good definition of this Law and the principle of karma:
The fundamental precept of Buddhism is Interdependence or the Law of Cause and Effect. This simply states that... cause gives rise to effect which in turn becomes the cause of further effect,... consciousness... flows on and on, gathering experiences and impressions from one moment to the next... a being’s consciousness contains an imprint of all these past experiences and impressions, and the actions which precede them. This is known as karma, which means ‘action.’
Karma comes from all of one’s acts, words and thoughts, which “determine a person’s fate in his next stage of existence;...” The dictionary offers “fate,” “destiny” and “kismet” as synonyms for karma, and relates the term to Buddhism and Theosophy.
But the concept of karma and the Law of Cause and Effect is not unique to Buddhism. The Bible is full of references to this law and the concept of karma:
Job noted that “... those who plow evil and those who sow trouble reap it.”
Many years later the prophet Hosea expressed the same idea: “But you have planted wickedness, you have reaped evil,...”
Jesus advised his followers: “Do not judge, or you too will be judged.”
And the apostle Paul reminded the church in Galatia that “A man reaps what he sows.”
Jung wrote about karma in several places. In “Aion” he defined karma as “the fate earned through works in previous existences,” and he associated the term with Theosophy. He also recognized the importance of the concept in understanding the nature of archetypes:
When... psychic energy regresses, going beyond even the period of early infancy, and breaks into the legacy of ancestral life, the mythological images are awakened: these are the archetypes. [Here he appends an informative footnote:] This... is... a deliberate extension of the archetype by means of the karmic factor, which is so very important in Indian philosophy. The karma aspect is essential to a deeper understanding of the nature of an archetype...
Ever the man of science, Jung was quick to admit that concepts like karma cannot be proven:
...karmic illusion—that is to say, illusions which result from the psychic residue of previous existences...karma implies a sort of psychic theory of heredity...we cannot even conceive how anyone could prove anything at all in this respect... Hence we may cautiously accept the idea of karma only if we understand it as psychic heredity in the very widest sense of the word. Psychic heredity does exist--...
Jung offered a “Western version of a prenatal karma” in the “very ancient idea of what we might call an inborn bill of debt to fate...” . Our contemporary American culture has this idea, but we put it in a modern vernacular: “What goes around, comes around.” What you put out eventually comes back to you.
All the above remarks relate karma to the individual, but it has collective application as well. The Dalai Lama noted this in his autobiography, when he discussed the Tibetan invasion of China in the 8th century. Back then Tibet was a war-like place and the aggressive Tibetans actually seized the Chinese capital in 763 A.D. The killing, looting and destruction created a karmic debt, even though Tibet soon fell under the influence of Buddhism and became a very pacific and non-aggressive society. No matter. The karmic debt still had to be paid, and the process of doing so began in 1950, when China invaded Tibet. In 1951, just as the Tibetans did 1,188 years earlier to China, the Chinese took over the capital of Lhasa.
At this point you might be wondering what all this has to do with America, its current situation and the “catastrophe” mentioned above. We’ll get to that shortly. First, we must define another key concept: “cosmic vanity” or “ontological arrogance.”

The Concept of Cosmic Vanity

The terms “cosmic vanity” and “ontological arrogance” are not mine. I got the first from theologian Charles Davis, the second from business consultant Fred Kofman. They mean essentially the same thing: “... the claim to a privileged knowledge of the origin, structure and workings of the cosmos... a temptation that dogs all religion ... [is] cosmic vanity.” “Ontological arrogance is the belief that your perspective is privileged, that yours is the only true way to interpret a situation....” “Ontological arrogance [is] when I assume that my truth is the truth.”
We can define cosmic vanity situationally:
The vain man assumes that the world is as he sees it and also takes for granted that others should see things the way he does... Cosmic vanity occurs when men impose their social structure upon the cosmos as a whole, falling into the conceit of interpreting the entire cosmos in terms of the limited preoccupations and organization of a particular society and culture.
and we are reminded, by Kofman, that cosmic vanity has consequences:
Our history informs our understanding of the present and the decisions and actions through which we shape our future. We reap what we sow, not just materially but also mentally.
which links the concept with the notion of karma mentioned above.
Cosmic vanity, or ontological arrogance, has several important features. The person who is cosmically vain is unable to distinguish his identity from his opinions, and so feels personally challenged or offended by those whose opinions differ from his. A second feature is the host of faulty assumptions that accompany cosmic vanity, e.g. that my point of view is objective; that no mental models filter my perception; that those who differ from me are wrong and simply don’t want to see the Truth. Other features include: repression and power games; mistrust, miscommunication and antagonism among people; low motivation; fear, stress and anger; a general mood of anxiety, cynicism and resentment among those who have to deal with such arrogance; people feeling disempowered; demoralization, as people feel unable to control their destiny; authoritarianism, solemnity and smugness. The ultimate result, in organizations, is “organizational collapse.” In societies where cosmic vanity is prevalent, the eventual result is a “fall,” as the old adage warns us.
Is America such a society? Has America been such a society? Hark back to the early days of the Puritan settlers. Did they think they had the Truth? Were they confident that theirs was the only right way to live and think? Did they demand that native people conform to their ways? If you have read the previous essays in this series (on American exceptionalism and America’s shadow) you know that the answer to all these questions is “Yes.” America, as a collective, has been steeped in cosmic vanity for centuries. It is a core part of our Puritanical heritage. It is part of our psychic makeup and, despite many generations of growing ethnic diversity, a majority of Americans operate in the unconscious assumption that our ways—Christian, democratic, technological, capitalist—are better than any other peoples’. The “American way” is the only right way; American values, the only right values; our American system of democracy, the only right form of government; free-market capitalism, the only right way to organize the process of providing for the material needs of society—this is how people think who are sunk in cosmic vanity. You may not see yourself in this portrait, but there are many Americans for whom it is very accurate.

America’s Karma or What did America do in its collective past that has karmic consequences?

Historically it has been cosmic vanity that led European settlers in the New World:
to butcher thousands of native people (because we knew we were better than they were)
to remove whole tribes from their lands (because we knew our system of private property was superior to the communalism of native people)
to “warehouse” Indians on reservations (because we knew we had better uses for the land—especially the lands with the gold mines—than native peoples had)
to “assault” Indian tribalism in the allotment act (because we knew our white governmental system was better than tribalism)
to seize Indian children and forbid them to speak their language, wear their native clothing, and eat their customary foods (because we knew it was our Christian duty to save the souls of the “heathen” and offer them the benefits of “polite” society)
to prohibit the practice of Indian religions and rituals (because we knew that our religion was the only right religion and by prohibiting their religion we would be saving their souls).
In the prior essay on America’s shadow I discussed other actions of our government and individuals that created karma. For many generations there have been many official policies of the United States government—written into our Constitution and Supreme Court cases —that have created karma.
Some people will try to weasel the United States out of the karmic implications of these acts by assuring themselves that what was done arose from the purest and most altruistic of motives. Such rationalizations are just more cosmic vanity. Racists insist that we had to do such things because the “primitive” people could not cope with reality. Racism denies the truth Jung called us to remember:
“in the end there is one psyche which embraces us all.”
We’re all in this thing we call life together. We are all one. And what we do to another person we do to ourselves. What goes around, comes around.
And what we put out hundreds of years ago is coming back to us now. On this a wide array of sources—Western Indian, Eastern Indian, African, as well as Jung himself —agrees: America’s karmic debt is up for repayment. How is this showing up? And what does it bode for our longer-term future?

Repaying Our Karmic Debt: Forms and Features

Cause begets effect. This is the Law of Cause and Effect. More than just an effect, there is a close similarity between what was done and what gets returned. In the example above, the Tibetans seized the Chinese capital; later on, their own capital got seized. In the case of America, so much of what we did was done out of cosmic vanity. So we should expect to get back our “stuff” from people equally imbued with cosmic vanity.
This is exactly what we see. The Islamic jihadists have just as much conviction about the rightness and superiority of Islam as the Puritans did in 1630 about Christianity. Just as Christian missionaries forced native peoples to convert to Christianity, so Osama bin Laden’s first demand to us after the 9/11 attacks was that we convert to Islam. Just as the U.S. government and Christian missionaries took measures to destroy native cultures, so the Islamic jihadists are taking measures (turning our technologies against us) to destroy what they regard as the “Great Satan,” the United States.
This confrontation between Christianity and Islam would not surprise Jung. European that he was, he recognized how deeply the experience of the Crusades had imprinted the European psyche. He understood how Muslims carried shadow for Europeans and how the mutually exclusive claims of universality of the two faiths had to be confronted at some point.
The Puritans were from Europe; they carried this component of the European shadow to the New World and it lives on in modern Americans. It may provide one answer to the many questions that arose after 9/11, e.g. Why didn’t we take Islamic jihadists’ threats to the World Trade Center seriously, especially after the 1993 bombing? Why did we put New York City’s Emergency Command Center in the World Trade Center after the 1993 bombings? Why didn’t we develop a strong Arabist desk in the State Department when the oil-rich Middle East became so crucial to the economic well-being of the United States? Why for decades did officials at Aramco look scornfully at their Arab partners? Why do we even now treat many Arab governments in a patronizing manner?
As I noted in the essay on America’s shadow, our ESTJ temperament does not incline us toward introspection or self-reflection. As a result, we experienced 9/11 and failed to realize it was a “wake up” call. Rather than suggest we look within and ask ourselves what message this tragedy was offering us, our leaders told us to get out and shop, get on airplanes and take a holiday! Clearly our system is so broken and our collective consciousness is so asleep that it will require something much more major, much more consequential than 9/11 to get us to examine the current unsustainable order of things.
Just what this “something more consequential” might be has been spelled out in numerous native prophecies. The Hopis’ are some of the most detailed and graphic:
Today we, Hopi and white man, come face to face at the crossroads of our respective life... It was foretold it would be at the most critical time in the history of mankind. Everywhere people are confused. What we decide now and do hereafter will be the fate of our respective people... Now we are all talking about the judgment day...
[the U.S. government is] ... a government which had assumed the power of the Creator but had lost all sense of moral values.... According to... prophecy... the higher forces would mete out justice. World War III would break out. The United States would be destroyed by a foreign nation, just as it, a foreign nation, had destroyed the Hopi nation. Land and people would be contaminated and destroyed by atomic bombs.
... as the time nears the predicted behavior of the people accurately describes the people of today. Perhaps it is time to repent and pray that our earth will not be totally lost....
... the world is facing a new crisis. This is a war of retaliation against terrorism.
Eventually a “gourd full of ashes” would be invented, which if dropped from the sky would boil the ocean and burn the land, causing nothing to grow for many years.... it could bring an end to all life unless people correct themselves and their leaders in time.
... Revolution could erupt on our land.
... men will destroy each other savagely. The period of this age will close by the gourd of ashes... Only those who are obedient to the guidance of the Great Creator’s laws will survive.
... the bad side of humanity will become so corrupted that the closing of the Fourth Cycle will be necessary.
World War III will be started by those peoples who first received the light [the divine wisdom or intelligence] in the other old countries [India, China, Egypt, Palestine, Africa].
The war will be a spiritual conflict with material matters. Material matters will be destroyed by spiritual beings who will remain to create one world and one nation under one power, that of the Creator.
After a presentation I gave in October 2008, at a training session for Pachamama facilitators, I was asked if it might be possible for America to avoid the full brunt of our karma. I replied that it was possible, but only if we, as a collective, did the same thing that individuals can do to “burn” their karma consciously. That is, we would have to take the same steps as individuals: First, get out of denial. As long as we remain in denial—stuck in all the platitudes and self-congratulatory rhetoric of American exceptionalism—we will never see what’s really going on. Getting out of denial implies waking up to the truth that there is something profoundly dysfunctional about our American way of life. Jung would call “waking up” becoming more conscious. If enough people become conscious we might mitigate our karmic repayment. That is, the “catastrophe” facing us might not have to be so bad.
The “size” and “nature” of our karmic payback are yet to be determined. All the prophecies are in agreement on this. The Hopi remind us that “The present crisis of world events is an unfoldment of life cycles which we set in motion through our own behavior.” If enough of us change our behavior, if we correct ourselves, if we heed the warnings, if we give up “life as usual” and “return to the original divine laws of the Great Creator,” if we begin to live simply, practice self-denial and self-sufficiency, if we change our priorities and believe that we can rescue the world, we can lessen the pain that our karmic debt will require. Most of all, Jung and all the native sources agree, we must “shift our attitude.” The future is not cast in stone: “... we can, by following the Instructions and Warnings, alter the pace, intensity, and force of the closing of the Fourth Cycle... we can, by our actions, purchase the time we need...”
When my students ask me how I think the shift from our current “Fourth World” to the coming “Fifth World” will look, I remind them of 1989. Many of them were not even alive then so I have to describe how the people of Eastern Europe “woke up” and realized they no longer had to accept the domination of the Soviet Union, and the various components of the Soviet Union realized they could be free. And the result was a massive transformation without a single shot being fired, a completely non-violent “Velvet Revolution.”
The Hopi believe such a transformation is underway even now, begun “by the humble people of little nations, tribes and racial minorities” which is fostering a new attitude.
As we join together with a new attitude in following the instructions, the mood of the world will change with us. Without a single overt thing taking place, the transformation will be underway. At first, no one will even know it is happening... People will become more caring and sharing... Without a single formal meeting, divided peoples will lay down their guns and begin to cooperate....
The Hopi also offer us a vision of the emerging Fifth World, a world “blooming in peacefulness,” one world, one nation, under one power, the Creator, a world in which people can communicate without words, with both humans and animals, a world of peace, joy and love.
Jung was explicit that, if we want to help this transformative process along, we must not look outside ourselves, to some collective (and certainly not to the United States government!). His sole concern was always “... with the fulfillment of that will which is in every individual.... That is the whole problem; that is the problem of the true Pueblo: that I do today everything that is necessary so that my Father can rise over the horizon. That is my standpoint....”
It is up to us—you, my reader, and me, and other individuals who are waking up—to work on ourselves in the knowledge that our personal transformation is also transforming the world. Get wise to the perils of American exceptionalism. Recognize the forms of our collective American shadow. These are important subjects to know about for understanding what’s really going, and how we cannot, must not, look to government, to political leaders and the powers-that-be to bail us out. The karma of our past is coming down on us. It might prove immensely destructive, or it might be limited to taking out the government, while leaving the bounty of our land relatively unscathed. The size and severity of the coming American catastrophe is up to us, our degree of consciousness, our “waking up” to who we are, what we are meant to be and do, to how we are meant to align with the purposes of the Universe.

Bibliography of Sources

Ali, Tariq (2002), The Clash of Fundamentalisms. New York: Verso Publications.
Bacevich, Andrew (2008), The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism. New York: Henry Holt.
Davis, Charles (1974), Temptations of Religion. New York: Harper & Row.
Deloria, Vine (1988), Custer Died For Your Sins. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
Fisk, Robert (2007), The Great War for Civilization. New York: Vintage Books.
Gyatso, Tenzin, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama (1990), Freedom in Exile: The Autobiography of the Dalai Lama. New York: Harper Collins.
Jackson, Helen Hunt (1881/1965), A Century of Dishonor: The Early Crusade for Indian Reform. New York: Harper.
Jung, C.G. (1959), “Aion,” Collected Works, 9ii. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1963), “Mysterium Coniunctionis,” Collected Works, 14. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1965), Memories, Dreams, Reflections. New York: Vintage Books.
________ (1966), “Two Essays on Analytical Psychology,” CW 7. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1969), “Psychology and Religion: West and East,” Collected Works, 11. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1970), “Civilization in Transition,” CW 10. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1976), ”The Symbolic Life,” CW 18. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Kirk, George (1949), A Short History of the Middle East. Washington DC: Public Affairs Press.
Kofman, Fred (2006), Conscious Business: How to Build Value Through Values. Boulder CO: Sounds True Press.
Lewis, Bernard (2003), The Crisis of Islam. New York: Random House.
Lewis, Jon ed. (2004), The Mammoth Book of Native Americans. New York: Carroll & Graf Publishers.
Mails, Thomas E. (1997), The Hopi Survival Kit. New York: Penguin Compass.
Mann, Charles (2006), 1491. New York: Vintage Books.
Nichols, Roger (2003), American Indians in U.S. History. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
Stray, Geoff (2005), Beyond 2012: Catastrophe or Ecstasy: A Complete Guide to End-of-Time Predictions. Lewes UK: Vital Signs Publishing.
Vogel, Virgil (1972), This Country Was Ours: A Documentary History of the American Indian. New York: Harper & Row.
Waldman, Carl (2000), Atlas of the North American Indian. New York: Checkmark Books.
Waters, Frank, Book of the Hopi. New York: Penguin, 1963.

]]> Susan Mehrtens info@jungiancenter.org http://jungiancenter.org/blog/blog_comment.asp?bi=32 2009-04-30T12:56:34-05:00 2009-04-30T12:56:34-05:00 2009-04-30T12:56:34-05:00 As I have done with other essays I will begin by defining the “shadow,” in Jungians terms; then I will consider the link between the shadow and the typological functions. After that I will consider the specific elements of America’s shadow and how our collective shadow manifests pathologically. Finally I will examine how it relates to American exceptionalism.

What does “shadow” mean?

As used in Jungian thought, the term “shadow” refers to the “hidden or unconscious aspects of oneself,” which the ego has either repressed or simply not recognized. It is “shadow” because we are “in the dark” about these parts of ourselves.
While we will focus primarily in this essay on the negative aspects of the shadow (which are more problematic than the positive) we should note that the shadow contains all the parts of ourselves that we don’t recognize as “us.” That is, there can be positive or good qualities, like creative impulses, realistic insights, and qualities that are not developed in our consciousness: things or activities we are not good at, or aspects of living where we are awkward or unadapted. So, for example, gross motor coordination (fine athleticism) is part of my shadow (I can’t walk and chew gum at the same time!). Athleticism is a good thing, to be sure, but it is not something I do well and it would be very difficult for me to develop my gross motor skills to a high degree. So we might say that athleticism is part of my shadow.
More difficult—what Jung called “a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality” —is to work with the negative forms of the shadow. We will focus on this form in the rest of this essay.
In its dark guise, the negative guise, the shadow includes all the things we are not proud of or would not want to see as part of us: repressed desires, uncivilized impulses, resentments, childish fantasies, morally inferior motives, behaviors that are anti-social or illegal. Because we don’t want to think poorly of ourselves, we very rarely actively seek to discover our shadow. Jung felt the shadow showed up, or confronted a person, at the outbreak of a neurosis. At such a time, we are confronted with both embarrassing insights into ourselves and also new possibilities (because the shadow offers the opportunity to enlarge our sense of self).
At this point we face a choice: We can take up the task of working with the shadow material OR we can willfully repress the shadow. But note this: repression does not make the shadow go away. It continues to exist in the unconscious and begins to express itself indirectly (e.g. in outer life) in situations that are not pleasant. Often in these situations we “project” the shadow out (unconsciously, of course) and then find ourselves having to deal with people who carry the projection. Life gets more difficult. Jung even uses the word “dangerous” at this point. The shadow wants to be reckoned with. Doing so produces change.
If we take the more prudent (but less palatable) course and confront the shadow, what happens next? Jung describes the process: We come to feel stuck. Many of the certainties in life come to seem doubtful. We find it hard to make moral decisions. We may feel ineffective or begin to question our convictions. In short, life does not get better immediately because the process of assimilating the shadow takes time.
Much as we might wish for a guaranteed “cookbook” approach to resolving the shadow problem, there isn’t any. Each person grapples with it in his/her unique way. It is always an individual process. But certain steps have been identified by Jungian analysts.
First, we must accept the shadow as part of us and take it seriously. Second, we must become aware of the shadow’s qualities and intentions. How to do this? By paying conscious attention to our moods, fantasies, impulses and dreams. Dreamwork is one of the most effective ways to get to know and monitor the shadow. Third, we hunker down for a long “process of negotiation,” what Jungians call (using the technical term in the German original) “Auseinandersetzung,” or “having it out with oneself.” In this process we metaphorically “wrestle” with ourselves inwardly, engaging the shadow material, then backing off, coming in again, withdrawing again and again. This phase of inner work can take months, but there is no set timetable and, as I remind my dream students, this is not a race: the work will take as long as it takes.
In discussing the shadow, we must mention a key point which relates to the quality of the shadow. By “quality” I refer to how dark or light the shadow is. This degree of darkness “depends on how much we consciously identify with a bright persona.” By this Jungians mean how highly we think of ourselves. If we think we are wonderful, superior to others, special, or gifted, our shadow is likely to be very dark and full of all sorts of stuff we are not likely to want to see or face. Why is this? Because the shadow stands in a compensatory relationship to our conscious sense of ourselves. This is important to remember when we examine America’s shadow in a later section of this essay. In the next section, we consider the link between the shadow and the type functions.

The link between the shadow and type functions

By “function” Jungians mean the 4 elements—Intuition (N)/Sensation (S), Thinking (T)/Feeling (F)—that Jung identified as the elements of personality type. This is not the place to get into a long disquisition on typology, so we will briefly describe the functions and then indicate how type relates to the shadow. Then we will relate all this to our collective American shadow.
Early on in his career Jung explored possible causes for his split with Freud and came to conclude that, to a degree, their falling out was due to a fundamental difference in personality. Jung realized that certain personality features are innate and he termed these “functions,” two being “rational” (i.e. able to be explained) —Thinking and Feeling—and two being “irrational” (i.e. not able to be explained through the use of reason) —Intuition and Sensation.
The rational functions, Thinking and Feeling, refer to how we make decisions, Thinking types preferring logic and reason and stressing objectivity, Feeling types preferring to use their feelings and values, with more of a subjective or personal focus. The irrational functions, Intuition and Sensation, relate to how we gain awareness or information about the world. Sensates use their senses, while Intuitives use something that circumvents the senses, their intuition.
In addition to the 4 functions, Jung recognized 2 personality attitudes, Extraversion and Introversion. These relate to the flow of psychic energy. In Extraverts, psychic energy tends to flow out to the external world providing the Extravert with more interest in outer reality than an Introvert usually has. In Introverts, psychic energy flows inward, giving the Introvert more awareness of his/her inner life than an Extravert usually has.
A final component of Jungian typology is the J/P distinction. “J” stands for “Judging” (not “judgmental”) and “P” for “Perceiving.” These terms refer to a person’s style of decision-making. Judgers prefer closure; they like to get things settled and agreed upon. They plan ahead and work well with deadlines and timeframes. Perceivers prefer to keep things loose and often find it a challenge to meet deadlines. They tend to resist closure and like to keep gathering information.
In Jungian convention, the types are described in a 4-letter system. So we speak of the ESTJ type, the INFP type and so on. If you are interested in pursuing the subject of Jungian types further, see the Bibliography. For our purposes, we must consider next the question of what the types have to do with the shadow, and, more specifically, what all this has to do with America’s shadow.
As we live our lives there often is a correlation between one’s type opposite and the shadow, especially if a person has a strong preference for an orientation and function. If, for example, a person is a strong ESTJ—highly oriented to the external world (E), operating strongly through the 5 senses (S), with a marked preference for objective, logical reasoning (T) and being decisive (J)—an encounter with a strong INFP (the type opposite) will be a confrontation with someone who carries some of his/her shadow qualities. Both parties might find it hard to work with, understand or resonate with the other (or, as often is the case with couples, both might find the other fascinating, albeit also mystifying, hard to fathom and, at times, exasperating).
My use of the ESTJ as an example is not haphazard: I chose it because the ESTJ is the type preference of nearly 75% of Americans. Given this marked preference in the American population, what sort of typological portrait can we paint of the typical American?
As an Extravert, the typical American is:
sociable and friendly
focused on outer circumstances
keenly aware of trends, fads and fashions
civic-minded
outgoing
a “joiner,” seeking to belong to groups around him/her
venturing easily into unknown situations
identifying the causes of things outside him/herself, e.g. “I’m moody because of the weather”
not given to much introspection or reflection
in Jung’s own experience of Americans (both his students in Zurich and on his multiple trips to America) he found the typical American to be talkative, business-like, unself-conscious, a “jolly fellow” in an “eager and excited collectivity.”
As a Sensate, the typical American is:
practical
sensible
down to earth
realistic
concerned with things
materialistic
concrete, with little patience for abstractions and theories
mechanical, with a gift for technical matters
the master of detail
security-seeking
the preserver of the status quo
distrusting of intangibles
loving new gadgets, with a creativity that is practical and technological
Jung found Americans had lots of physical endurance, and were efficient and very much focused on the “yellow god.”
As a Thinker, the typical American is:
objective
analytical
concerned about laws, principles and policies
“oriented to objective reality”
a poor listener
well-suited for business, industry, production, the sciences and law
Jung felt the typical American invested words with power and his thinking was simple and straightforward; with his feeling less adapted, Americans were inclined toward sentimentality and unrestrained emotions.
As a Judger, the typical American is:
punctual
decisive
good at planning and scheduling
comfortable with deadlines and timeframes
moralistic
likely to see the world in black-and-white terms
likely to jump to conclusions or to decide too quickly
likely to judge others according to his own rules and principles
likely to judge others without looking within, at his own actions
Jung regarded the American on this score as efficient, righteous, sectarian, promiscuous, impetuous and concerned with “conspicuous respectability.”
Given this description of the typical ESTJ American, what might we expect the American shadow to look like? Type theory would suggest that some of our collective shadow would be drawn from qualities found in the INFP type. Specifically, we might expect to find our collective shadow shows up in our:
giving little time to introspection
disinclination to do much inner reflection
preference for the superficial, with a tendency to project inner “stuff” on to others, leading to a poor or inaccurate assessment of reality
mistrust of intuition, with a denigration of right-brained activities (e.g. “Oh, that’s just your imagination!”)
falling into gross hedonism
putting a premium on things (“He who dies with the most toys, wins!”)
becoming susceptible to dark fantasies and suspicions
exploiting people and animals
failing to listen well; poor listening ability
projecting feelings, leading to jealousies, anxieties and suspiciousness
tough-mindedness, the flip side of which is denigration of caring and caretaking
fondness for talking of Truth, leading to a moralizing style full of “oughts” and “musts”
trying to force others into our mold or ways of doing things
having poor access to our feelings, producing poor relationships and crude tastes
believing that “the end justifies the means”
becoming hypersensitive, leading to pettiness, aggression and mistrust of others
becoming rigid and dogmatic
becoming fearful of doubt, which can lead to fanaticism
creativity becoming stagnant and regressive
falling into what Jung called “mental passivity”
having difficulties in handling moral ambiguity
jumping to conclusions
having naive attachments to religious movements
“grotesquely punctilious morality”
falling into “blatant Pharisiasm, religious supersitition and meddlesome officiousness”
Our ESTJ character well suits the businessman, entrepreneur, lawyer, scientist, academic, athlete and engineer. Shadow occupations, in our culture—those that require more of an INFP temperament—include child care worker, social worker, minister, psychotherapist, artist and counselor. Given the bias toward the ESTJ it is no wonder that the caring professions get short shrift and less pay.

What is America’s shadow?

We’ll consider this question from several angles: historical (how our national shadow has appeared in our past) and topical (how our collective shadow has affected our foreign and domestic policies, our personal lives and lifestyle choices, and our attitudes and habits of thinking).
We see one of the first examples of our shadow in history in the very earliest days of the Puritan settlement of New England. Our Puritan ancestors claimed to be chosen by God as moral exemplars to the world, and then went out and massacred the Pequot Indians. We Americans then spent the next 200 years systematically decimating millions of other native peoples and wiping out their cultures.
We waxed eloquently about human beings’ inalienable rights while we enslaved millions of Africans for the economic advantage slavery meant to us. We even went so far as to write slavery into our Constitution.
We fought a Civil War to settle the debate about slavery and after that war we enfranchised all men, but left one-half of our population out of the political process. It took women another 55 years to gain the right to vote and we are still waiting to see full equality.
We exult in our honor and moral probity, yet the United States government broke over 400 treaties made with its native populations. Clearly “keeping our word” counts only in some contexts.
We claimed we had a “manifest destiny”—called by God to “liberate” the people of the Philippines from Spain—and, in the process of doing so, we killed 600,000 Filipinos in 1899.
The Vietnam War was rife with examples of America’s shadow side, from the twisted logic of destroying villages to “save” them, to the massacre of civilians at places like My Lai.
Most recently, the Bush Administration determined it had a mission to free the Iraqi people from the yoke of the dictator Saddam Hussein, and in doing so we caused the death of tens of thousands of people, the looting of the antiquities of the country, and the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib.
Our wars afford numerous examples of our shadow. In other ways our foreign policy is also replete with shadow. In the previous essay on American exceptionalism we noted the principle of “exemptionalism,” in which the United States exempts itself from treaties, like the Kyoto protocol on climate change. We demand special treatment by other countries, even as our own court system disregards the legal decisions of other nations. In foreign policy, the United States plays by its own rules and the result is that the world sees us as “an exceptionally arrogant bully.” For our part, we are blind to how other countries perceive us. Our rhetoric in foreign affairs is high-minded, hiding our ulterior pursuits or actions. This causes other countries to charge us with hypocrisy. For example: we champion human rights and then produce an Abu Ghraib; we capture prisoners in Iraq and hide them from the International Red Cross; we deny Afghan prisoners the protections of the Geneva Conventions by classifying them as “enemy combatants,” but raise all sorts of objections if other nations fail to treat U.S. soldiers according to the rules. We force our system on other countries while undermining individual liberties at home. In trying to remake the world in our own image we run a foreign policy full of “imperial delusions,” but, in our unconsciousness, we fail to see what we are really doing. And finally, we rely on military power to conceal the problems caused by our domestic profligacy.
Our domestic policies provide numerous examples of our American shadow. Take health care. We run it under a business model, which reflects the failure (typical of the ESTJ type) to value caring and caregiving. So we put the health of the pocketbook before the health of people, and produce a disease-care system in which the human being is defined as “an income-generating biological structure,” or as a source for “spare parts” (kidneys, lungs etc.). We create a class and political system that favors the wealthy and powerful, resulting in a venal government that is more a plutocracy than a democracy. We maintain a host of civic myths—like the viability of the two-party system—at a time when our society is getting more and more multi-cultural and diverse and in need of multiple parties and a variety of forms of political expression. In our Extraverted tendency toward “group think” we suppress dissent. We regard violence as an appropriate way to solve problems and our culture (e.g. television, movies, video games) promotes violence. We incarcerate more people per capita than any other country in the developed world. When faced with an assault to our high-minded rhetoric (like Abu Ghraib) we refuse to engage difficult ethical issues, refusing to ask ourselves why such tragedies happen. We also refuse to recognize the fundamentally amoral nature of capitalism and the consequences this has on our body politic. We continue to use the death penalty, when the rest of the Western world recognizes its barbarity. Our Sensate nature promotes materialism, and this materialistic ethos has led to our living far beyond our means, on both the individual and collective levels. Our huge national debt is causing crises economic, political and military, thanks to “our national self-indulgence.” We fail to see how our political system is held hostage to corporate lobbyists, and we turn a blind eye to how “we are squandering our wealth and power now,” as we compromise our freedom. We fail to see how our federal government has become warped, with the rise of the “imperial Presidency.” Despite 9/ll and the absence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, we are unable to recognize how our national security system is broken: it cannot provide us with accurate, reliable intelligence. We cannot see how we are now contracting out the business of national security, and how the Pentagon has consistently lied about its capabilities. Our democracy now is “hollow” and “false:” we believe the two parties—Democrats and Republicans—are substantially different and that changing the party in power will really result in substantive change, but in reality the “elements of continuity far outweigh the elements of change.” This means stasis in our political system. The Sensation Judging type does not like change. Change is part of our American shadow. But change is also a central part of life and we Americans, with our ESTJ bias, resist change at our peril.
Our collective shadow also shows up in our lifestyle choices. Look at our poor dietary practices: the popularity of “fast foods” and junk foods, and the epidemic of obesity and diet-related diseases like heart disease, hypertension and diabetes. “Consumeritis,” “omnivorous consumerism,” leads us to “shop til we drop.” We are told by the media and powers-that-be that consuming is our civic duty. The materialism of the Sensate leads us to compulsive acquisition of stuff and this “getting and spending” that Wordsworth so decried has produced an unsustainable economic system and a soul-deadening focus on continuous material growth. Not that we have much time to enjoy all our gadgets and gizmos: “24/7, 365” is the emerging standard in the workplace, leading to widespread workaholism and lack of balance in our daily lives. Other forms of addiction are common too: abuse of alcohol and illicit drug use are growing problems. Our cultural definition of success is “the good life,” interpreted in strictly material terms: “status objects,” accumulated wealth and the “newest, new thing.” We ignore completely the truism that the best things in life are not things. Our refusal to live within our means has produced a national way of life that is both unsustainable and spiritually destructive.
Finally we see examples of our national shadow in our attitudes and habits of thinking. We claim to be the “land of opportunity” open to immigrants, but we have demonstrated prejudice against immigrants from the time of the “Know Nothings” up to our present resentment of Hispanics and illegal aliens. With our attitude of superiority we claim to have the best system, but refuse to recognize our flaws and foibles. The recent election saw numerous instances of racist rhetoric and racial slurs. Another example of a shadow attitude is our arrogance in thinking we are capable of operating a global war on terror. And we see shadow in our attitude of denial.
As I noted in the essay on Denial in the Wake Up/Leap Frog set of essays elsewhere on this Web site, denial is not that river in Egypt! Denial is a dangerous psychological defense mechanism that warps our perception, prevents healthy change and contributes to the growing pathology of our culture. Our national shadow has become pathological. Why pathological? Because it is producing suffering.
We are suffering, as a culture, from high rates of child mortality, child poverty, and failure in our schools. Poor single mothers and their families are suffering as we eliminate welfare for them, while fat-cat corporations get all sorts of bailouts and handouts from Washington. We suffer from high rates of crime, incarceration and gun ownership. We suffer from high levels of repression, causing a large percentage of our population to experience addictions, neuroses and psychoses. We suffer as we denigrate and devalue caring, compassion, vulnerability, feelings and weakness. Because denial blocks change we are not likely to shift our system any time soon. Stasis is even more likely due to the effect of American exceptionalism, which was the subject of the previous essay.

How American exceptionalism relates to our collective shadow

We mentioned earlier how the quality of the shadow is keyed to how much one identifies with a bright persona. If we think very highly of ourselves, if we see our public image in a very positive light, then our shadow will be the opposite: very dark. The brighter the conscious self-image, the darker the shadow.
As we noted in the essay on American exceptionalism, there is a tradition in the United States, especially among conservatives and Republicans, of regarding America as exceptional, in the sense of being more moral, a moral exemplar, superior, having the best system of government in the world. In short, our national persona is very bright. So our national shadow is very dark.
More than this, Jung regarded us as “one-sided.” In being willing to look only at our bright side, in our reluctance to examine our faults, even when, as in 9/ll and Abu Ghraib, they are thrown in our face, we are in denial. And this can have dire consequences.
Jung warned that such one-sidedness leads to the build-up, in the collective unconscious, of a huge enantiodromia. The term Jung took from the pre-Socratic Greek philosopher Heraclitus. It means “a running to the opposite,” and it refers to the compensatory nature of the unconscious. If our conscious orientation is very one-sided, the unconscious “compensates” by building up energy on the other side. Eventually this situation becomes unstable and there is a dramatic shift. In a collective, this has very severe consequences.
Jung recognized that Americans historically have projected our collective shadow on to our black and “Red Indian” populations, as well as on to Communists (during the Cold War). Were Jung alive, he would see we are doing the same thing now with jihadists and terrorists. To what end?
Jung was quite explicit on this score and we disregard his warning at our collective peril: In America, he said, “there seems to be an astonishingly feeble resistance to collective influences...” and collective action “... makes people unaware of themselves and heedless of risks.”
Heedless of risks. We are failing to heed Jung’s warning. The size, cause, nature and deep background of the coming American catastrophe is the subject of the next essay in this series.

Bibliography

Aldrich, Nelson (1988), Old Money: The Mythology of America’s Upper Class. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Bacevich, Andrew (2008), The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism. New York: Henry Holt.
Baltzell, E. Digby (1964), The Protestant Establishment: Aristocracy & Caste in America. New York: Random House.
Birmingham, Stephen (1968), The Right People. New York: Dell
Carman, Harry, Harold Syrett & Bernard Wishy (1961), A History of the American People, 2nd ed., 2 v. New York: Alfred Knopf.
Deloria, Vine (1988), Custer Died For Your Sins. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
DuBois, W.E.B. (1965), The Souls of Black Folk, in Three Negro Classics. New York: Avon.
Eland, Ivan (2004), “American Exceptionalism,” The Independent Institute (October 26, 2004); available on the Web; URL: http://www.independent.org/printer.asp
Flexner, Eleanor (1975), Century of Struggle: The Woman’s Rights Movement in the United States, rev. ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Friedan, Betty (1963), The Feminine Mystique. New York: Dell.
Fussell, Paul (1983), Class: A Guide Through the American Status System. New York: Summit Books.
Giannini, John (2004), Compass of the Soul: Archetypal Guides to a Fuller Life. Gainesville FL: Center for Applications of Psychological Type Inc.
Hannah, Barbara (1976), Jung: His Life and Work, A Biographical Memoir. New York: G.P. Putnam.
Hollis, James (1993), The Middle Passage: From Misery to Meaning in Midlife. Toronto: Inner City Books.
Hymowitz, Carol & Michaele Weissman (1978), A History of Women in America. New York: Bantam Books.
Eland, Ivan (2004), “American Exceptionalism,” The Independent Institute (October 26, 2004); available on the Web; URL: http://www.independent.org/printer.asp
Jackson, Helen Hunt (1881/1965), A Century of Dishonor: The Early Crusade for Indian Reform. New York: Harper.
Jacobs, Ron (2004), “American Exceptionalism: A Disease of Conceit,” Counterpunch (July 20, 2004); available on the Web: URL: http://www.counterpunch.org/jacobs07212004.html
Johnson, James W. (1965), The Autobiography of an Ex-Colored Man, in Three Negro Classics. New York: Avon.
Jung, C.G. (1959), “Aion,” Collected Works, 9ii. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1963), “Mysterium Coniunctionis,” Collected Works, 14. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1969), “Psychology and Religion: West and East,” Collected Works, 11. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1971), “Psychological Types,” Collected Works, 6. Princeton: Princeton University Press
Keirsey, David (1998), Please Understand Me II: Temperament, Character, Intelligence. Del Mar CA: Prometheus Nemesis Books.
________ & Marilyn Bates (1984), Please Understand Me. Del Mar CA: Prometheus Nemesis Books.
Kluger, Rivkah Scharf (1995), Psyche in Scripture: The Idea of the Chosen People and Other Essays. Toronto: Inner City Books.
Kroeger, Otto & Janet Thuesen (1988), Type Talk. New York: Dell.
________ (1994), 16 Ways to Love Your Lover. New York: Delacourt Press.
Liptak, Adam (2008), “One in 100 U.S. Adults Behind Bars, New Study Shows,” The New York Times (February 28, 2008).
Moelaert, John (1974), “The Epidemic in Our Midst,” Earthkeeping: Readings in Human Ecology, ed. C. Juzek & S. Mehrtens. Pacific Grove CA: Boxwood Press.
Monkerud, Don (2008), “Isn’t It Time for the U.S. to Rejoin the World?,” Counterpunch Weekend Edition (October 17/20, 2008); available on the Web: URL: http://mostlywater.org/american¬_exceptionalism
Moyers
Myers, Isabel Briggs with Peter Myers (1980), Gifts Differing. Palo Alto CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Nash, Gary ed. (1979), The Private Side of American History, 2nd ed., 2 v. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.
Nichols, Roger (2003), American Indians in U.S. History. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
Rossi, Alice, ed. (1973), The Feminist Papers. New York: Bantam.
Seis, G. (2003), “American Exceptionalism.” URL: http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/courses/ed253a/american-exceptionalism.html
Sharp, Daryl (1991), C.G. Jung Lexicon: A Primer of Terms & Concepts. Toronto: Inner City Books.
________ (1987), Personality Types: Jung’s Model of Typology. Toronto: Inner City Books.
Spiro, Peter (2000), “The New Sovereignists: American Exceptionalism and Its Fall Prophets,” Foreign Affairs (November/December 2000), available on the Web: URL: http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20001101facomment932/peter-j-spiro/
Stamp, Kenneth (1956), The Peculiar Institution: Slavery in the Ante-Bellum South. New York: Vintage Books.
Vogel, Virgil (1972), This Country Was Ours: A Documentary History of the American Indian. New York: Harper & Row.
Von Franz, Marie-Louise & James Hillman (1971), Jung’s Typology. Dallas TX: Spring Publications
Waldman, Carl (2000), Atlas of the North American Indian. New York: Checkmark Books.
Warner, W. Lloyd (1960), Social Class in America. New York: Harper & Row.
Washburn, Wilcomb (1975), The Assault on Indian Tribalism: The General Allotment Law (Dawes Act) of 1887. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott.
Washington, Booker T. (1965), Up From Slavery in Three Negro Classics. New York: Avon Books.
Zinn, Howard (1993-2006), “The Power and the Glory: Myths of American exceptionalism,” Boston Review; available on the Web: URL: http://bostonreview.net/BR30.3/zinn.html

]]> admin webmaster@yourdomain.com http://jungiancenter.org/blog/blog_comment.asp?bi=31 2009-04-02T09:53:01-05:00 2009-04-02T09:53:01-05:00 2009-04-02T09:53:01-05:00
“America is an exceptional country.”
Sarah Palin
“I do believe in American exceptionalism”
John McCain

The topic of this essay—American exceptionalism—may not be familiar to many readers of this blog as it is not something taught in schools, but in the last Presidential election both Sarah Palin and John McCain mentioned it. As we look ahead to the future, and particularly the future of the United States, the concept of American exceptionalism is important to understand, and we will mention it in the two essays that follow this one. In this essay we will define “American exceptionalism,” then examine how it has shown up in American history, consider some of its implications and then offer a Jungian “take” on it.

What does “American exceptionalism” mean?

A concise, as well as easily accessible definition is provided by Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
American exceptionalism ... refers to the belief that the United States differs qualitatively from other developed nations, because of its national credo, historical evolution, distinctive political and religious institutions, ethnic origins and composition, or national ideals.
To understand what “differs qualitatively” means, we’ll consider each part of the definition:
“historical evolution” refers to the founding myth of the Puritan colonists, who felt they were charged with a special spiritual and political destiny to create in the New World a church and society that would be a model for the rest of the world. John Winthrop expressed this in his statement that he and his fellow colonists were creating a “city on a hill” that others in the future would be able to look to for inspiration on how to live an exemplary life. Believing they were chosen by God to be moral exemplars, the Puritans felt they were “blessed by Providence.” Later generations developed and extended this idea, as we shall see later, when we consider how American exceptionalism has manifested in our history.
“national credo” has been embodied or expressed in several ways: It appears in documents, particularly the Declaration of Independence (“...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal...”), the Constitution (“We, the people of the United States... do ordain and establish this Constitution...”) and Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address (“... this nation, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal....”). It frequently shows up in Presidential speeches (The United States is “mankind’s last, best hope,” a “beacon on a hill,” “God’s own country,” “the indispensable nation” and a “shining city on a hill.”). Finally, American exceptionalism as a national credo got carved in stone—on the Statue of Liberty, in a stirring poem by Emma Lazarus: “Give me your tired, your poor/Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free/The wretched refuse of your teeming shore/Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me:/I lift my lamp beside the golden door.” Written, spoken or carved, words like these reflect the United States’ unique nature.
“ethnic origin and composition:” Mention of the Statue of Liberty and the message carved on its base reflects another component of the definition of American exceptionalism. More perhaps than any other country in the world, the United States draws its population from everywhere. There is no single predominant cultural origin here, and America for centuries has provided “upward mobility” without rigid castes or an official noble class. Its open social structure makes it unique.
“distinctive political and religious institutions and practices:” The official documents that established the United States separated church and state. There is no state religion in this country and such secularism is not the norm elsewhere. The absence of socialism and the failure of labor unions to organize into labor parties are also unusual. The most remarkable form of American exceptionalism is found in our diplomatic and foreign policies, in our isolationism, with our mistrust of entangling foreign commitments and the refusal of our federal judges to submit to the rulings of other jurisdictions; in our tradition of deprecating power politics and old-fashioned diplomacy; in the assumption we make that American values and practices are universally valid and appropriate for the rest of the world; and in our “exemptionalism,” in which U.S. courts exempt America from adherence to international treaties.
“national ideals:” We express our ideals in such statements as “America, land of liberty,” “The United States is the land of opportunity,” and “America, beacon of freedom.”
Clearly, American exceptionalism is a complex concept, including many aspects of our history and culture, with many facets and components. Some of these facets are positive, others negative. On the positive side, scholars of American history point to the following statements or claims:
The United States has a special role in the world.
The U.S. has a special destiny and mission.
The U.S. is the only nation founded on an ideal.
The U.S. is different from other nations in its underlying values.
The U.S. sees diversity as a strength.
The United States is distinctive.
The U.S. stands outside of history.
The U.S. is more patriotic than other lands.
American conservatives go farther in their claims, to offer a form of American exceptionalism that exalts the United States as superior to other nations, being richer, more democratic, more religious, and with the best values and institutions yet devised.
In reaction to this “triumphalism” other scholars remind us of the negative face, in such statements as:
The United States believes the rest of the world should adapt to American ways.
The U.S. thinks it can, and should, force its version of democracy on to others (e.g. Iraq).
The United States is ethnocentric.
The U.S. is hyper-nationalistic.
The U.S. is an arrogant bully.
The U.S. fails to listen to other countries.
The U.S. falls into a “double standard:” criticizing others while ignoring its critics.
The United States suffers from a “disease of conceit.”
The U.S. is blind to the misery its global crusades have caused others (e.g. Vietnam, Iraq).
The Vietnam and Iraq wars are only two of the many ways American exceptionalism has manifested in our history. We turn now to consider others.

How American Exceptionalism has manifested in U.S. history

From the 17th to the 21st centuries, American exceptionalism has appeared in every era of U.S. history. The Puritans in the 1630’s brought an “exceptionalist logic” to the New World. Feeling they were making a clear break with the corruption of Europe, they saw themselves in a covenantal relationship with God, charged with the special spiritual duty to lead other nations.
While the tradition of republicanism died out in Britain, it was taken up by the revolutionaries in America in 1776. The revolutionary pamphleteer, Thomas Paine, spoke of America as a “new land” with nearly unlimited potential. The Declaration of Independence abrogated the power of monarchy and described human beings as having inalienable rights. Twenty years later, the Constitution vested sovereignty in the people and put strict limits on ecclesiastical power in separating church and state. All of these served to make the United States unusual.
Fifty years later, the country’s uniqueness was obvious to foreign visitors. The astute Alexis de Tocqueville was the first to use the term “exceptional” in describing America and its society:
The position of the Americans is therefore quite exceptional, and it may be believed that no democratic people will ever be placed in a similar one. Their strictly Puritanical origin, their exclusively commercial habits, even the country they inhabit, which seems to divert their minds from the pursuit of science, literature, and the arts, the proximity of Europe, which allows them to neglect these pursuits without relapsing into barbarism, a thousand special causes, of which I have only been able to point out the most important, have singularly occurred to fix the mind of the American upon purely practical objects. His passions, his wants, his education, and everything about him seem to unite in drawing the native of the United States earthward; his religion alone bids him turn, from time to time, a transient and distracted glance to heaven. Let us cease, then, to view all democratic nations under the example of the American people, and attempt to survey them at length with their own features.
With his French background, inquiring mind and perspicacity, Tocqueville was well placed to observe the American experience with more objectivity than any native. In this succinct summary he identifies several ways in which America was/is exceptional:
our Puritanical origins; our focus on commerce (i.e. our penchant for making money—a quality that Jung also noted a century later); the practical bent of the American mind; our educational tradition oriented to problem-solving (praxis, not theory); and the “transient” diversion of religion. He concluded that America was incomparable and had to be taken on its own terms.
A few years after Tocqueville wrote Democracy in America, an American journalist, John O’Sullivan, coined another key term in the history of American exceptionalism: “Manifest Destiny.” Soon taken up by Jacksonian Democrats, the concept of manifest destiny was used as a rationale to acquire Texas, the Gadsen Purchase and the Mexican cession. What does “manifest destiny” mean? Essentially it was an extension of the Puritans’ original idea of being destined by God to create a better world in the new land. Now that they were here, with a growing population, there was a clear (i.e. obvious or “manifest”) destiny to expand geographically into the rest of the American continent. Some scholars suggested that the American spirit was created by the frontier, so it was divinely ordained that we were meant to push westward and bring the blessings of Providence to the “wilderness.”
In 1899 the Republican Party took up the idea of manifest destiny to justify the Spanish American War and the annexation of Puerto Rico, Cuba, the Philippines and Panama. President William McKinley claimed that he had been told by God to go to war to free these lands from the yoke of Spain. The Secretary of War, Elihu Root, reflected the idea of American exceptionalism in his touting of the American soldier as the “advance guard of liberty and justice, of law and order, and of peace and happiness.”
All this while, millions of immigrants were on the move. From the 1860’s on, the United States had become the goal for many of them. It was the land of freedom—freedom to choose an occupation; freedom to move around and relocate wherever one wanted; freedom to rise in social status; freedom to aspire socially, politically, economically. Successful immigrants like Carl Schurz and Andrew Carnegie offered examples of how America fostered social mobility. In gifting the United States with the Statue of Liberty France was recognizing how this country had become a magnet for dissidents, malcontents, persecuted, oppressed, beleaguered and restive peoples.
World War I and its aftermath revealed the streak of isolationism inherent in American exceptionalism. It took the sinking of American ships to get the country into the war, and afterwards the U.S. Senate refused to support Wilson’s internationalism, in its repudiation of the League of Nations. In the interwar years a growing “America First” movement sought to keep the United States out of involvement with Europe. Once again, it was only Pearl Harbor that overcame the isolationists’ reluctance to get involved in World War II. American exceptionalism became the subject of scholarly studies in the interwar years, and the focus of academic controversy between conservatives (who touted the country’s special nature) and liberals (who pointed up the darker side of the American experience).
After World War II, when the United States had emerged as the clear global leader, men like Henry Luce (the publisher of Time, Life and other major periodicals) declared the 20th century the “American century.” Luce suggested that the United States had the right to use its influence however it saw fit. Colleges and universities set up American Studies programs and the term “American exceptionalism” emerged, to reflect the uniqueness of the American experience and American culture.
The Cold War of the 1950’s-1980’s provoked lots of rhetoric about the freedom of the American way of life, in contrast to the tyranny of Communism. Many scholars and social analysts described the “American dream” of owning a home and becoming well off. During the Reagan/Bush years of the 1980’s American exceptionalism got more polished. Reagan, for example, added to the Puritans’ claim, talking in speeches of “the shining city on a hill.” By the 1990’s American exceptionalism had become a popular subject in scholarly circles, with more than 10 books on the subject appearing in that decade.
Which brings us to our own era. The election of 2000 saw another conservative in the Oval Office. Chosen by the Supreme Court, George W. Bush sparked a resurgence of the conservative form of American exceptionalism. The “neo-cons” trumpeted the United States “going it alone” in foreign policy. Following the principle of exemptionalism, we refused to join other nations in a host of treaties. We refused to submit to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. The Bush Administration articulated the doctrine of preemptive war, in the name of safeguarding our way of life and the spreading of liberty and democracy around the world —all with the unspoken assumption that the “American way” is better and appropriate for everyone in the world. The experience of 9/11 produced rampant hyper-nationalism, with a surge in sales of American flags, men joining the military to fight for our freedom, and ubiquitous bumper stickers extolling “pride in America,” “support the troops” etc.
In sum, American exceptionalism has manifested historically as:
national pride, with a sense of being chosen by God
a strong moral strain in the American character and political rhetoric
a colonizing attitude, in our expansion into the interior of North America
imperialism, in our overseas adventures in various wars
chauvinism, in the belief that ours is the best nation
attempts to remake the world in our image
Over the 400 years of our history the various facets of American exceptionalism have grown and developed. Now we will shift our focus from history to analysis, to consider what American exceptionalism implies.

The implications of American exceptionalism

For the sake of clarity, we can distinguish two types or classes of implications: domestic and international. Let’s consider the international implications first.
ethnocentricism: national chauvinism, with a strong sense of the superiority of our values and way of life, along with claims of the universality of our values and moralistic judgments of other nations.
imperialism: Teddy Roosevelt said “Speak softly and carry a big stick.” And we have often carried our “big stick” into other countries in the name of liberating them from dictators, Communists, tyranny—the list is long, the rhetoric always the same.
exemptionalism: we claim the right to opt out of treaties and conventions and, in our “legal isolationism,” our judges refuse to recognize the decisions of other courts.
unilateralism: the U.S. is willing to “go it alone” and invokes its divine mission to justify its actions, while, at the same time, wanting to have it both ways: we want to be able to drive our gas-guzzling cars with cheap gas, even though that gas comes from other countries.
The domestic implications are those internal habits, practices and behaviors that mark our country in an unusual way. These include:
character traits, e.g. optimism, self-reliance, independence, egalitarianism and individualism (which, in its stress on individual rights, breeds a tendency toward litigiousness).
a set of myths, e.g. that the United States lacks a class system (this is a “myth,” in that, while classes are not as obvious as in Europe, Americans certainly recognize social distinctions in background, education, tastes and lifestyle).
greater religiosity than in other nations: our Presidents invoke God as the guide for their actions; “God bless America” signs appear on buildings and the Kate Smith recording of the song plays at Yankee games, and polls consistently indicate that more Americans are regular church-goers than in most other countries.
normative assumptions and judgments: commentators regularly note the moralistic streak in American values, the moralistic judgments we make of other nations, the double standard and hypocrisy in the disconnect between what we do and what we say.
materialism: Tocqueville noted this nearly 200 years ago; it is no less a feature of our way of life now. We interpret the “American dream” in material terms. We have, as a society, a strong sense of entitlement. Our economy is built on consumerism and there is massive inequality in the distribution of our national wealth.
perceptual problems: We have a self-perception of uniqueness and moral superiority, along with “willful nationalistic ignorance of the faults committed by the American government.” Conservatives feel nostalgia for earlier times, while some analysts of the American character note how we deceive ourselves, blinded by our “conceit.”

A Jungian Perspective on American Exceptionalism

In our survey so far, we have spoken of pride, a sense of superiority, a sense of specialness, moralism, materialism, ethnocentricism, a sense of divine mission, blindness to our faults, deception and conceit. What do all these point to, from a Jungian point of view? Inflation.
What do Jungians mean by “inflation”? Daryl Sharp defines “inflation” as “a state of mind characterized by an exaggerated sense of self-importance, often compensated by feelings of inferiority.” Jung spoke of inflation as “a puffed-up attitude.” Certainly when our political leaders appeal to our patriotism, speak of our specialness, call upon our unique responsibilities, refuse to cooperate with other countries, and ignore treaty responsibilities, we are displaying a collective attitude of inflation.
Why such inflation? The Jungian analyst Edward Edinger provides us with an insightful list of causes: The American mind has been shaped by the American past, a past in which all but the indigenous natives have been immigrants. The experience of being uprooted is part of the psychic experience of all Americans. Most of us, in other words, go back to dissidents, malcontents, outcasts, or the rejected, persecuted and enslaved. The result in our deep unconscious psyche? We all have feelings of cultural inferiority, with a lack of the deep rootedness to a place that Europeans have. Edinger feels we compensate for these feelings of inferiority with arrogance, especially technological arrogance. This arrogance is a form of pride.
What follows pride? The Bible reminds us that “Pride goeth before a fall.” In collective terms, a “fall” would be “... a violent breakdown of the social order.”
Jungians would regard American exceptionalism, or at least the conservatives’ triumphalist form of it, as a dangerous feature of American life. It, and its implications, are things we must become aware of now. Jung was quite explicit about this:
An inflated consciousness is always egocentric and conscious of nothing but its own presence. It is incapable of learning from the past, incapable of understanding contemporary events, and incapable of drawing right conclusions about the future. It is hypnotized by itself and therefore cannot be argued with. It inevitably dooms itself to calamities that must strike it dead.
Our situation sounds pretty grim. But Jung was not a fatalist: he offered a way to avoid the destruction of the American polity:
... this state of unconscious possession will continue undeterred until we...become scared of our “god-almightiness.” Such a change can begin only with individuals, for the masses are blind brutes, as we know to our cost. It seems to me of some importance, therefore, that a few individuals, or people individually, should begin to understand that there are contents which do not belong to the ego-personality, but must be ascribed to a psychic non-ego.... Very few people care to know anything about this; it is so much easier to preach the universal panacea to everybody else than to take it oneself, and, as we all know, things are never so bad when everybody is in the same boat. No doubts can exist in the herd; the bigger the crowd the better the truth—and the greater the catastrophe.
The way out is through us: the “very few.” Jung is speaking to us. If you are reading this blog essay, you are hereby put on notice that you are one of the “few” he is speaking about. The change has to begin with us, with you. You need to be aware of American exceptionalism and the dangers it holds. You need to take up the task of creating more consciousness in the world. And Jung warns us that we must not, cannot look to political leaders (however much we might like and have high hopes for Obama). Our leaders are caught up in the mass movement; they have to be, to get elected. So we cannot expect them to see the reality of our situation. If we are to have a cooperative, humble, viable society, we have to take up the task of becoming conscious ourselves, working on ourselves, so we can be the “makeweight” that will tip the scales into a future world that works for everyone.

Bibliography


Anderson, Ron (2008), “Taking Exception to American Exceptionalism,” Tag Archives; available on the Web: URL: http://contexts.org/eye/tag/american-exceptionalism/
Bacevich, Andrew (2008), The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism. New York: Henry Holt.
Carman, Harry, Harold Syrett & Bernard Wishy (1961), A History of the American People, 2nd ed., 2 v. New York: Alfred Knopf.
Economist, The (2008), ”Only in America;” available on the Web: URL: http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/PrinterFriendly.
Edinger, Edward (1984), The Creation of Consciousness. Toronto: Inner City Books.
________ (1995), Melville’s Moby-Dick: An American Nekyia. Toronto: Inner City Books.
Eland, Ivan (2004), “American Exceptionalism,” The Independent Institute (October 26, 2004); available on the Web; URL: http://www.independent.org/printer.asp
Frel, Jan (2006), “Could Bush Be Prosecuted for War Crimes?” (July 10, 2006); available on the Web: URL: http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/38604
Ignatieff, Michael, ed. (2005), American Exceptionalism and Human Rights; abstract available on the Web: URL: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8080.html
Jacobs, Ron (2004), “American Exceptionalism: A Disease of Conceit,” Counterpunch (July 20, 2004); available on the Web: URL: http://www.counterpunch.org/jacobs07212004.html
Jung, C.G. (1953), ”Psychology and Alchemy,” Collected Works, 12. Princeton: Princeton University Press (identified in the notes as CW 12)
________ (1966), “Two Essays on Analytical Psychology,” Collected Works, 7. Princeton: Princeton University Press (identified in the notes as CW 7).
Kohut, Andrew & Bruce Stokes (2008), “The Problem of American Exceptionalism,” Pew Research Center Publications (May 9, 2008); available on the Web: URL: http://pewresearch.org/pubs/23/the-problem-of-american-exceptionalism
Lipset, Seymour Martin (2000), “Book Review of American Exceptionalism by Deborah Madsen,” The Journal of American History, 87, 3; available on the Web: URL: http://www.historycooperative.org/cgi-bin/printpage.cgi
Monkerud, Don (2008), “Isn’t It Time for the U.S. to Rejoin the World?,” Counterpunch Weekend Edition (October 17/20, 2008); available on the Web: URL: http://mostlywater.org/american¬_exceptionalism
Seis, G. (2003), “American Exceptionalism.” URL: http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/courses/ed253a/american-exceptionalism.html
Sharp, Daryl (1991), C.G. Jung Lexicon: A Primer of Terms & Concepts. Toronto: Inner City Books.
Spiro, Peter (2000), “The New Sovereignists: American Exceptionalism and Its Fall Prophets,” Foreign Affairs (November/December 2000), available on the Web: URL: http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20001101facomment932/peter-j-spiro/
Thimm, Johannes (n.d.), “American Exceptionalism—Conceptual Thoughts and Empirical Evidence,” available online.
Tocqueville, Alexis de (1945), Democracy in America, 2 v., ed. Phillips Bradley. New York: Vintage Books.
Turner, Frederick Jackson (1890/1920), The Frontier in American History. New York: Henry Holt; also available in digital form on the Internet
Wikipedia, “American exceptionalism.” URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism
Zinn, Howard (1993-2006), “The Power and the Glory: Myths of American exceptionalism,” Boston Review; available on the Web: URL: http://bostonreview.net/BR30.3/zinn.html




]]> admin webmaster@yourdomain.com http://jungiancenter.org/blog/blog_comment.asp?bi=30 2009-02-23T12:45:04-05:00 2009-02-23T12:45:04-05:00 2009-02-23T12:45:04-05:00
Part III: Our Current Situation in an Alchemical Context

In this part we will examine the 4 alchemical phases with reference to specific events in the daily newspapers that provide us with insights into the phases underway in this transitional time. Then we will consider what the next few years might hold for us, using alchemy as a guide to the future.

Pick up the daily newspaper and what do we read about? Major forest fires burning thousands of acres and leaving hundreds of people homeless. Massive hurricanes dissolving beaches, breaking down structures, flooding whole cities. Tens of thousands dying in large earthquakes and terrorist attacks. Currencies losing their value. The revelations of corruption at all levels of business and government, as Governors and Senators are forced from office for malfeasance, bribery, or other “high crimes and misdemeanors;” heads of state castigating other heads of state as “the axis of evil” and refusing to engage them on the world stage; Wall Street tycoons getting huge paychecks, CEOs claiming big bonuses, “golden parachutes” and salaries hundreds of times larger than those of ordinary workers; hot shot “dealmakers” fancying themselves “Masters of the Universe;” confusion, bewilderment, disorientation and melancholy as tens of thousands of people lose their homes in the mortgage crisis; hundreds of young people becoming addicted to drugs or alcohol each year; major banks collapsing, ratcheting up the anxiety level throughout our society.

Do we need to wonder what is going on? Clearly we are now in the nigredo stage as a society, experiencing the calcinatio (fires), solutio (floods), mortificatio (dying), inflation (both economic and personal), the putrefactio (corruption), confrontation with the shadow (which George Bush projected out in seeing others as “evil”), greed, confusion, sickness of spirit, and anxiety. This is not a good time in our collective reality! Some elements of our society would have us believe it is the beginning of the end, that we will soon witness Armageddon or the Apocalypse.

But Jung reminds us that the nigredo is not meant to be the end. It is only a phase, the hardest phase, admittedly, but one that we are meant to grow through. Using alchemy as our road map, we can also see signs of the albedo, the phase after the nigredo.

We see the strong passions and bitter hostilities that are characteristic of the albedo phase in the Obama-Clinton exchanges during the Presidential primaries. Other examples of this are: the hostilities between Sunnis and Shi’ites in Iraq, between Tibetans and Chinese in Tibet, and between the Islamic jihadists and the U.S. military in Afghanistan. There is growing awareness of the need to balance opposites like home and work, work and play, in, for example, the studies of Anne Wilson Schaef and others on the dangers of addictions (e.g. workaholism). In the rise of feminism, gender studies on college campuses, and the women’s rights movement internationally we see growing attempts, on the collective level, to integrate animus and anima. In the rising awareness of holistic health, eating disorders and the value of diet in health maintenance we see the redemption of body and matter. The popularity of the books by Marion Woodman speaks to the growing concern with the body and its connection to soul. Finally, the environmental movement is the modern form of Hildegard’s benedicta viriditas, the blessedness of “greenness” and life on this planet.

Signs of the rubedo phase are just emerging in our collective experience. Renewal seems to be showing up in the growing number of people who are now working on healing themselves, including becoming conscious of the unconscious. New attitudes are appearing: there is more respect now being given to indigenous peoples and what they can offer us; more people are waking up to how global capitalism is destroying the planet; reverence is being given to Mother Earth in more places and more ways; the push for peace is growing as more people wake up to the reality that violence never solves anything; we are seeing a more conscious holding of the tension of opposites, as more people recognize the “clash of universalisms” and realize that gravity—and the Source of gravity—truly does work for everyone (even those who profess a different religious belief). As more people “authorize their own lives” they look within for direction and recognize the wisdom that their inner Divinity offers. Finally, we are hearing messages (even in media like television that usually pander to the lowest common denominator) reminding us “we’re all in this together,” and in such venues we are seeing nascent visions of unity. “Nascent” because this phase is just beginning to emerge on the collective level.

The nigredo, by contrast, is well underway. What does it suggest the next few years are likely to hold for us?

Our Possible Future in an Alchemical Context

The years ahead are likely to see widespread confusion—times when people really aren’t clear as to what’s happening. Disintegration—where things fall apart—is also likely, in what George Land called the “breakdown” time (which makes possible the “breakthrough” later on). Another likely part of our future is aggression: anger against oneself, as well as with other people. All sorts of base passions are likely to rise up: rage and jealousy, resentment and frustration.

There is likely to be lots of death. In the mortificatio people experience the death of various aspects of themselves or the death of some important people in their lives, or the death of a phase of life, or the death of a job. Given the current round of layoffs reported daily in the news, we are witnessing lots of mortificatio now. Deaths from fires, earthquakes, typhoons, hurricanes and tornados show up on the evening news with distressing regularity. We might also see widespread deaths from epidemics.

There are lots of dangers in the collective form of the nigredo, and these dangers are likely to continue until we have moved out of this phase. There are demonic energies at work, energies from our unreconstructed side, energies from those people in the collective who would cause disintegration and disharmony and who would try to break down whatever is whole and healing. This is part of our confronting the shadow in ourselves and in our culture.

There is, in this time, lots of projection of the shadow. I noted George Bush as a stellar example of this, with all his talk of the “axis of evil” in North Korea, Iran, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, and Osama bin Laden. We are projecting the shadow out on to these people, rather than recognizing it in ourselves. Unless or until we, as a collective become more reflective and introspective, we are likely to continue to see the shadow outside.

Another quality of the nigredo phase is emotional outbursts, and it is very likely that we will see further expressions of anger and rage as more people become confused, disoriented and anxious. Many are likely to be highly emotional and volatile.

More and more people will recognize the old ways are inadequate (we have seen some of this already, in the enthusiasm with which people greeted Obama’s call for change). In the nigredo, on the individual level, it does eventually dawn on the person that the old way in which s/he has been living probably isn’t working very well anymore. In many cases people at this point fall into psychological depression. On the collective level it is very likely that we will fall into economic depression. Given the gross materialism of American culture, I think it is going to take something as severe as the Depression of the 1930’s to jog people out of the warped values our culture is mired in.
So, for those very much identified with their stuff, there is likely to be a sickness of spirit, manifested perhaps in acute despair. Many people will feel all is lost, all is gone, there is no hope etc. There may be suicides and homicides. A friend of mine recently lost his daughter when her husband discovered that his many millions of dollars had disappeared in the mortgage crisis. His response to that was to kill her and then jump off the Delaware Memorial Bridge. We are likely to see tragedies like this from people whose entire sense of identity is invested in material stuff.

Illusions are likely to be shattered. After 8 years of George Bush (with his 20% approval rating), there are not many people who still put their hopes in the federal government. It has become obvious that the federal government wouldn’t be able to find its way out of a paper bag. They’re certainly not going to save us. People looking to government for solutions will be disappointed and this may lead to uprisings and riots, perhaps even rebellion and revolution. Around the world people are likely to be forced by events to recognize that government does not have the solution, and this is not just in the United States. In general, governments are not going to be able to solve our problems. National governments are actually atavisms, that is, at a certain period of history they were appropriate but, as we have evolved collectively, as a global civilization, national governments are no longer appropriate. I think over the next 3 or 4 decades there will be growing recognition that national governments are yet another source of divisiveness and problems, being too big to solve local problems and too small to solve global problems.

There will be other illusions that have to be shattered as well. For example, Americans tend to think that we have the best country in the world, the best systems and all the answers. That illusion definitely has to be dispelled and years of neglect to our civic infrastructure may help to do this. We’re likely to see the breakdown of the systems that run the country: glitches in the electric grid, problems with transportation—subway systems, roads etc. We are already seeing this in Vermont where major bridges on federal highways (vital arteries, not back roads!) have been closed due to poor maintenance. This (and the enormous rise in the price of petroleum) will lead to widespread disruption in distribution systems and in the transportation of vital resources. In some locales there may be empty food shelves. If you live in an area very near farms and places where people can grow food this may not be as much of a problem. But in many of the major cities there will be problems from disrupted distribution chains.

The nigredo is a time when there is very little reflection or introspection, because the old mode of orientation to the outer world is still so entrenched. It’s only toward the end of this phase that the individual begins to make a habit of looking within. Then s/he becomes far more reflective and starts to wonder what’s going on at deeper levels. Prior to this the tendency is to try to figure out who can be blamed for the misery the person is experiencing.

On the collective level the early stage of the nigredo is likely to show up in accusations, of pointing the finger, of fixing blame on somebody or some group or agency of government. A current example is the Food and Drug Administration. We look to the FDA now to protect the safety and purity of our food and pharmaceuticals. So, in the face of e-coli outbreaks, contaminants in food and drugs, salmonella epidemics, etc. we want to find out who can be blamed.

The nigredo is not a pleasant time and prophecies from many sources warn us that it’s going to get worse before it gets better. As I noted in Part I, the last of Jung’s prophetic visions foretold the destruction of most, but not all, of the world. He felt this was 50 years in the future, which means he anticipated some sort of cataclysm in 2011. This date coincides with ancient Mayan prophecies that identify 2012 as the time of a major shift of perception. Some speak of this as “the end of time,” which might refer to the point at which human beings switch from living mostly out of the left brain (which is time-bound) to right-brain dominance (the right brain operates outside of linear time).

It will be very important in this nigredo phase, when things are going from bad to worse, that we remember this phase is not the end. It is merely a clearing-out phase. It is a phase meant to prepare us, as a society, for the albedo phase. If you are reading this blog posting you should be aware that you are doing so for a deeper reason than mere interest in the Jungian Center: on some level, whether you are conscious of it or not, you agreed to sign on to share this message with other people so that more and more people come to realize this is not the end. Although there may be mass destruction and global catastrophe, this is not meant to be the end. It is a transitional phase, just one phase (difficult, to be sure) but the necessary breakdown phase. It will clear away what has to be removed so that we can break through to a much better reality.

The nigredo prepares us for the albedo phase. As I noted earlier, in Part II, the albedo is easier than the nigredo. In the individual it is the time when a person begins to confront and deal very consciously with his or her contrasexual side. On the collective level this is likely to take the form of a re-evaluation and a re-appreciation of the feminine. The feminine, and women, will move much more into positions of equality, true equality with the masculine, with men. The feminine perspective will be integrated into all aspects of life. In doing this we will begin to differentiate our capacity to relate to our fellow human beings. We will resist falling into the herd phenomenon, and we will also have to work at transcending “bi-polar thinking,” i.e. seeing things in dichotomies, or the “us-them” way of thinking. In bi-polar thinking, it’s man versus woman. Rather than this “either-or” mode, we will have to learn to think more inclusively, with a “both-and” approach. As we learn to hold the tension of opposites we will see the emergence of what Jung called “the transcendent function,” the function that reconciles these opposites into the “mystic marriage,” where the animus and anima, the masculine and feminine, are integrated.

Given our thousands of years of history of bi-polar thinking, this new way will not be easy. It thwarts the will of the ego, which isn’t used to thinking like this. It isn’t used to treating the opposite gender in this way so there will be some struggle (especially for men), but it’s not going to be as difficult as the nigredo phase was. We can also anticipate that with the re-appreciation of the feminine will come a revering of Mother Nature, of planet Earth, and all things associated with The Mother. A real ecological consciousness will arise in people as part of the albedo phase on the collective level.

The albedo will eventually lead to the rubedo. This will be a breakthrough time. On the individual level it is a time when all the scattered pieces of life are accepted and integrated and we come to sense within the archetype of wholeness that, in the ancient world, was called the Anthropos. This is also the time when the body and matter are spiritualized. In other words, this is the phase when the individual recognizes that matter is not primary.

In our materialistic culture now we definitely operate under the assumption that matter is what’s real. This is an error, and people will begin to recognize this error in the next few years, during the nigredo phase, as their identification with matter and money and outer things falls away. The point of all the destruction in the nigredo phase is to get us to recognize that it is not matter that is primary: spirit is primary. We are fundamentally spiritual beings. While we are on earth we are having a physical experience. But we are not essentially matter. So, on the collective level in the rubedo phase, spirit will become recognized as primary and we will relinquish possessive attitudes. We won’t be so focused on “our” stuff; we won’t feel things have to be our “own.” Eventually there is likely to be complete sharing.

During the rubedo phase people will come more and more to recognize their inner divinity, the divine spark within them. In this stage of enlightenment matter will come to be sanctified. The Earth will be seen as sacred and we will begin to give respect to indigenous peoples’ sacred places and spaces. There will much more of a push for global peace and unity—the recognition that all peoples are in this world together.

In the final phase, the citrinitas, there will be no conflict. Peace will be the norm. The Hopi prophesy that everyone will be able to communicate telepathically, with animals as well as other humans. All limiting thought will be gone. Everyone will understand the cosmic plan and everyone will recognize our divinity as human beings. We will not believe in separation between humans and the world, or between people and their Creator. In other words, the current idea in Western civilization that humans are somehow separate from and superior to Nature—that they have “dominion” over Nature—will be recognized as an extremely destructive way of thinking and will be gone. Life will be directed by the Self (with a capital S). Life will not be ego-driven. The technologies that we use will serve the cosmos and the living Earth, and will not be driven by greedy corporations that have to constantly push stuff on to us to continue to expand their bottom line. Technologies will be very Earth-friendly. Love and joy will be experienced all the time. There will be no governments because there will be no need for governments. As Locke and Hobbes remind us, governments derive from a certain attitude or vision about the nature of human nature, and that, of course, will be seen in a very different way in the citrinitas phase, when the adaptation to a cosmic consciousness will be complete.

Conclusion

Why should we be hopeful as we look ahead? For several reasons: first, we must recognize that despair is disempowering, and the only thing that despair produces is more despair. The nigredo is likely to be a difficult time, but we must not fall into despair. The nigredo is just one phase and the others will be easier.

We should also remember that we have choices. John Perkins, the author of The World Is As You Dream It, reminds us that by the visions we set for reality we determine the kind of reality we have. We can choose to dream a positive dream or a positive vision for the future and the dream will make it so. If we choose to dream a negative dream, or if we choose to fall into despair, it’s going to worsen the conditions around us, and we could possibly put an end to the planet. This is a choice and it’s our choice to make. Each person counts here.

In The Undiscovered Self, which is one of the books Jung wrote for a lay audience, he said that each individual has to recognize that he or she could very well be the “makeweight,” that is, the crucial figure that tips us into a whole new mindset. Many decades later this was what Malcolm Gladwell called the “tipping point.” None of us knows who this crucial figure might be: it could very well be any one of us. If you are reading this blog posting, you are hereby put on notice that you count and you could be the crucial figure who tips us into a new reality.

I am often asked “How do you think we’re going to get there?” In response I go back to 1989. There are a lot of people that don’t remember that period. A lot of my students weren’t even born in 1989. But in 1989 there was a massive transformation of Europe and not a single shot was fired. There was no violence at all, but at some point the countries of Eastern Europe recognized that they were no longer under subjugation. They could leave the Soviet bloc and the Soviet Union fell apart. Now how did that happen? It happened because there was a fundamental shift of attitude on the part of most of the people. I think that, in time, people are going to wake up—they will make a major shift in attitude—and will recognize that the reality we have now is fundamentally unsustainable, extremely unjust and ecologically destructive. And in this recognition, our current reality will loose its legitimacy.

There are a whole series of indigenous cultures, in addition to medieval alchemy, that provide us with descriptions of what we are going through now. They describe the lay of the land in this phase of our journey. These cultures and alchemy, like ancient maps, note “Here be dragons.” “This is a danger spot.” “This is going to be a difficult interval.” They lay out forks in the road. These forks are choice that we must make. As Yogi Berra said, “When you get to the fork in the road, take it!” But there are a lot of people in our culture now, and certainly in the years ahead, who will take that fork but then they’ll wander around looking for the knife and the spoon as well. In other words, they’re not going to make a choice. They’re going to be dithering. They will be very reluctant to move on to a new, more viable reality.

Native cultures and alchemy describe the destination that Nature intends us to reach. In other words, the fork that we are meant to choose is toward a better world, a world of peace, a world of environmental reclamation, a world of harmony, a world of wholeness. This is the fork that we’re meant to choose. As Jung would remind us, our role as individuals is to become more conscious of our responsibility, to come to recognize who we are, what we are meant to be, how we are meant to serve, and how we individually can work for a world that works for everyone.

The culture today would keep us disempowered. It wants you to be locked down into fear—fear of terrorists, fear of illegal aliens, fear of losing your job, fear of losing your house—all sorts of fears. You can choose to go down that path but I guarantee you your reality and your future will not be nice. You can also choose to recognize what the authorities are trying to do: people that are fearful are very much easier to control. Then you can say to yourself, “I’m not going to buy that! I’m not going to allow the powers that be to disempower me! I am going to claim my choice, as an individual, to begin to serve the new, better reality which is coming.” Armed with the road map of alchemy and Jung’s prophetic visions, you can be prepared for the challenges and exciting future that is in store for us.

Bibliography of Sources

Ardagh, Arjuna et al. (2007), The Mystery of 2012: Predictions, Prophecies and Possibilities. Boulder CO: Sounds True.
Arguëlles, Jose (1987), The Mayan Factor. Santa Fe: Bear & Co.
Bacevich, Andrew (2008), The Limits of Power. New York: Henry Holt.
Boynton, Holmes (1948), The Beginnings of Modern Science. Roslyn NY: Walter Black.
Brussat, Frederic & Mary Ann Brussat (1996), Spiritual Literacy: Reading the Sacred in Everyday Life. New York: Scribner.
Calleman, Carl (2004), The Mayan Calendar and the Transformation of Consciousness. Rochester VT: Bear & Co.
Choate, Adam, Dana Rowzee & Jerred Tinsley (2005), “CEO Pay Rates: U.S. vs. Foreign Nations.” URL: www.cab.latech.edu/~mkroll/510_papers/fall_05
Crombie, A.C. (1959), Medieval and Modern Science, I. Garden City NY: Doubleday.
Dante Aligheri (1961), Paradiso, trans. John Ciardi. New York: New American Library.
Edinger, Edward (1985), Anatomy of the Psyche: Alchemical Symbolism in Psychotherapy. Chicago & LaSalle IL: Open Court.
Fassel, Diane (1990), Working Ourselves to Death. San Francisco: Harper.
Gilbert, Adrian and Maurice Cotterell (1995), The Mayan Prophecies. New York: Barnes & Noble.
Gladwell, Malcolm (2003), The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference. Cleveland OH: Wheeler Publishing.
Hannah, Barbara (1976), Jung: His Life and Work. New York: G.P. Putnam.
Harman, Willis (1988), Global Mind Change. Indianapolis: Knowledge Systems.
Harvey, Charles (2002), Anima Mundi: The Astrology of the Individual and the Collective. London: Centre for Psychological Astrology Press.
Jackson, Eve (1996), Food and Transformation: Imagery and Symbolism of Eating. Toronto: Inner City Books.
Jung, C. G. (1970), “Civilization in Transition,” Collected Works, 10. Princeton: Princeton University Press (hereafter listed as CW).
________ (1971), “Psychological Types,” CW 6. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1966), “Two Essays on Analytical Psychology,” CW 7. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1960), ”The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche,” CW 8. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1959), ”The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious,” CW 9i. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1970), “Civilization in Transition,” CW 10. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1969), “Psychology and Religion: West and East,” CW 11. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1953), “Psychology and Alchemy,” CW 12. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1967), “Alchemical Studies,” CW 13. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1963), “Mysterium Coniunctionis,” CW 14. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1965), Memories, Dreams, Reflections. New York: Vintage Books.
________ (1958), The Undiscovered Self. New York: New American Library.
Keen, Sam (1992), “Dying Gods and Borning Spirits,” Noetic Sciences Review (Winter 1992).
Keirsey, David & Marilyn Bates (1984), Please Understand Me. Del Mar CA: Prometheus Nemesis Books.
Kristof, Nicholas (2008), “Talia For President,” The New York Times (November 16, 2008), 14WK.
Land, George (1986), Grow or Die: The Unifying Principle of Transformation. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
________ & Beth Jarman (1992), Breakpoint and Beyond: Mastering the Future Today. New York: Harper Collins.
Lewis, Bernard (2003), The Crisis of Islam. New York: Random House.
Mails, Thomas (1997), The Hopi Survival Kit. New York: Penguin Books.
Mander, Jerry (1991), In the Absence of the Sacred. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
McGeehan, Patrick (2004), “Masters of the Universe, Leashed (for Now),” The New York Times (July 18, 2004), 3WK.
Perkins, John (1994), The World Is As You Dream It. Rochester VT: Destiny Books.
Pinchbeck, Daniel (2006), 2012: The Return of Quetzalcoatl. New York: Tarcher/Penguin.
Schaef, Anne Wilson (1985), Women’s Reality: An Emerging Femaile System in a White Male Society. San Francisco: Harper.
______ & Diane Fassel (1988), The Addictive Organization. San Francisco: Harper.
Sharp, Daryl (1991), C.G. Jung Lexicon: A Primer of Terms & Concepts. Toronto: Inner City Books.
Stray, Geoff (2005), Beyond 2012: Catastrophe or Ecstasy: A Complete Guide to End-of-Time Predictions. Lewes UK: Vital Signs Publishing.
Tarnas, Richard (2006), Cosmos and Psyche: Intimations of a New World View. New York: Viking.
von Franz, Marie-Louise (1980), Alchemy: An Introduction to the Symbolism and the Psychology. Toronto: Inner City Books.
________ (1998), C.G. Jung: His Myth in Our Time. Toronto: Inner City Books
Wagner, Suzanne (1998-1999), “A Conversation with Marie-Louise von Franz,” Psychological Perspectives, 38 (Winter 1998-1999), 12-39.
Waters, Frank (1963), Book of the Hopi. New York: Penguin Books.
Wolfe, Tom (1987), The Bonfire of the Vanities. New York: Bantam Books.
Woodman, Marion (1982), Addiction to Perfection. Toronto: Inner City Books.
________ (1993), Conscious Femininity. Toronto: Inner City Books
________ (1980), The Owl Was a Baker’s Daughter. Toronto: Inner City Books
________ (1985), The Pregnant Virgin. Toronto: Inner City Books
________ (1990), The Ravaged Bridegroom. Toronto: Inner City Books



]]> admin webmaster@yourdomain.com http://jungiancenter.org/blog/blog_comment.asp?bi=29 2009-02-06T10:43:33-05:00 2009-02-06T10:43:33-05:00 2009-02-06T10:43:33-05:00
Part II: Alchemy and Its Phases—A Road Map for Individuals and Cultures

“Alchemy.” The word conjures up medieval men hunched over flasks and fires trying to turn lead into gold. Historians of science regard alchemy as the precursor of modern chemistry. The dictionary defines it as “a combination of chemistry and magic studied in the Middle Ages, especially the search for a process by which cheaper metals could be turned into gold and silver...” It was part of Jung’s genius, born out of his respect for ancient ways and wisdom traditions, to recognize that the medieval alchemists were about something much more profound than making gold out of lead.

Rather than metallurgical transformation, alchemy is about the process of personal transformation. Lead is symbolic of the basic unconscious state that we’re in when we come into the world, and the gold is the achievement we reach when we have developed in ourselves what Jung called “individuation,” that is, when we have become fully and truly who we are meant to be. This process of change takes many forms, involves many processes and takes us through many phases as we work to individuate.

Jung and his followers (especially Marie-Louise von Franz) describe the phases of alchemical change using the terms developed by the early alchemists. These medieval researchers were fluent in the scholarly language of the day, Latin, hence the terms show up in forms that are foreign to the ears of most contemporary Americans.

The alchemical change process occurs in four major phases: the nigredo, the albedo, the rubedo and the citrinitas. In this Part II we will define and describe each phase in terms of an individual’s experiences. Then we will apply the phase on the collective level, in a general way. In Part III we will relate the phases to our current reality, with reference to specific events and phenomena we are witnessing now, and then look into the future.

The Nigredo

The first of the phases is dark, dismal, a very black time, well-labeled the nigredo, which comes from a Latin word (niger) meaning “black” or “dark.” For the person in this phase, life is not pleasant, as it is full of confusion and bewilderment, disorientation, sickness of spirit and confrontations with the shadow. Jealousy, envy, irritability, anxiety, self-righteousness, greed, melancholy and inflation are just some of the panoply of feelings that show up during this most difficult of the phases.

A variety of alchemical processes are part of this time, including:

the putrefactio, when we come to recognize some component of our existence is putrid, or rotten, with little or no energy left to feed our life.

the mortificatio, “death”—of people, things, parts of ourselves, in a metaphorical or (more rarely) literal sense—which leaves us with a sense of loss and grieving.
the calcinatio, “burning” or the “refiner’s fire” spoken of in the Old Testament, the process in which we experience the frustration of our desire nature, with the purpose of purifying or “refining” our will.

the solutio, or dissolution of one or more of the elements of our existence that give our life structure, a process during which we are flooded with affect.

These are just a few of the more than dozen processes that alchemists recognized and described. Since each alchemist wrote from his/her own experience, each alchemical text describes the order, sequence and processes differently, making close comparison difficult. But Jung saw the close correlation between their varied descriptions and what he himself experienced in his own development and in that of his patients.

The nigredo is the phase when we are still operating mostly unconsciously. Our complexes are mostly autonomous in this beginning phase. As a result, we suffer more acutely than in the later phases.

The Albedo

The term albedo comes from the Latin albus, meaning “white” or “bright.” Things begin to feel lighter, “brighter” in this phase, compared to the previous misery of the nigredo. The work of this phase is to become aware of our “contrasexual side” and make the acquaintance of our “inner partner.”

As we wrestle with our complexes and strive to domesticate them, we experience strong passions and bitter hostilities, within and without, in dealings with others (often those closest to us). The challenge is to balance the opposites and achieve an integration of the animus/anima. In the process of the sublimatio, we become more objective, able to rise above situations to see them from a transcendent perspective. In developing a conscious relation to the inner man (for a woman) or woman (for a man), we redeem the body and matter, and come to experience what the great 13th century abbess, Hildegard of Bingen, called benedicta viriditas, the blessedness of being alive.

In the albedo phase we work to bring up from the unconscious (that is, we “redeem”) attitudes and feelings about ourselves, our bodies, our sexuality, the opposite sex and the host of feelings we have around embodiment itself. The purpose here? To come ultimately to a deeper level of wholeness and a greater appreciation of life on the physical plane.

The Rubedo

The third phase means “reddening” in Latin and just as our face reddens in the process of blushing, so we experience a surge of renewal in the rubedo phase. After confronting the shadow in the nigredo and wrestling with our inner opposite sex in the albedo, we come to the third phase more able to hold the tension of opposites (good and bad, male and female). The process of the sublimatio has led to the development of new attitudes, and the deus absconditus (the hidden god within) becomes known. Through long-term conscious suffering the ego now becomes conscious of the Self: we begin to recognize the wise source of inner guidance. After numerous experiences of “crucifixion” the ego begins, in this rubedo phase, to subordinate itself to an authority higher than it. The Self becomes actualized, rather than just a potential within. And we begin to be able to sustain the paradox of recognizing our divine nature without identifying with it.

By this point in the spiritual journey life is feeling very different from where we were, and what we were feeling, when we set out in the nigredo phase. By this penultimate phase, life seems to be working better, we feel better—as if we are “getting our act together.” Stay the course and we come to the final phase.

The Citrinitas

The source of our English word for the yellow-green gemstone “citrine,” citrinitas is the alchemical term for the final phase of transformation, the fulfillment of the opus, or work, the metaphorical “gold.” A new day dawns. A new way of being lies before us, as we recognize ourselves as filii macrocosmi (children of the Universe). Fertilized by spirit, illuminated by repeated transmutations of our inner dross into the “gold” of consciousness, we participate consciously in the process of creation in this final phase. We consciously take up our role as co-creators with the Divine.

These four phases—nigredo, albedo, rubedo, citrinitas—describe the stages of alchemical change not only on the individual level. Jung recognized that “the collective psyche shows the same pattern of change as the psyche of the individual.” This being so, collective life would manifest the following:

in the nigredo phase: fires, floods, epidemics and natural disasters, plane crashes and other events that leave hundreds or thousands dead; inflation, in the economic sense of rising prices; the discovery of rot and corruption in the public sphere, in corporations and in government; greed, with the basic motivation being money, with people being “bought” in a variety of ways, and the political system held hostage by the plutocrats or moneyed interests; large segments of the population not understanding what’s going on in the world, experiencing confusion, disorientation, feelings of being “out of the loop,” shut out of public life; sickness of spirit, with many signs of spiritual malaise, e.g. widespread substance abuse, domestic violence, child abuse, sexual violence; anxiety and irritability, along with a rash of psychosomatic illnesses, a rise in mental illness and more minor forms of madness like “road rage.”

in the albedo phase: confrontations between the sexes; public debates about the role of women in the public sphere; protests and agitation for more equal rights for women and minorities; more push to integrate women and minorities into the mainstream of our collective life
in the rubedo phase: more discussion of unity, the interdependence of all beings (not just human beings), the preciousness of life, a growing reverence for life and Earth, our planet that sustains our life; and the appearance of new attitudes and concerns (e.g. the growing planetary awareness of global warming)
in the citrinitas phase: new ways of being and living that create a world that works for everyone, all beings, not just humans; the rise of a way of living and working that sustains natural systems, that provides spiritual fulfillment and economic justice to all. Visionaries in indigenous cultures hundreds of years ago have provided descriptions of this phase as a time of: peace (all sources of conflict are gone); union (all recognize that we are one); life directed by the Creator, with everyone understanding the cosmic plan; everyone being able to communicate with everyone and everything else (i.e. telepathy is the usual way communication occurs); a single currency, with no governments; love and joy being experienced all the time.

In general terms, this is how we might expect the alchemical stages to show up on the collective level. In Part III we get specific. Was Jung right? Can we see actual events in our current reality that might suggest just where we are along the alchemical road map? We will address these questions in our March blog posting.

Bibliography of Sources

Ardagh, Arjuna et al. (2007), The Mystery of 2012: Predictions, Prophecies and Possibilities. Boulder CO: Sounds True.
Arguëlles, Jose (1987), The Mayan Factor. Santa Fe: Bear & Co.
Bacevich, Andrew (2008), The Limits of Power. New York: Henry Holt.
Birkhäuser-Oeri, Sibylle (1988), The Mother: Archetypal Image in Fairy Tales. Toronto: Inner City Books
Bond, D. Stephenson (2003), The Archetype of Renewal. Toronto: Inner City Books
Bosnak, Robert (1998), A Little Course in Dreams. Boston: Shambhala.
Boynton, Holmes (1948), The Beginnings of Modern Science. Roslyn NY: Walter Black.
Brussat, Frederic & Mary Ann Brussat (1996), Spiritual Literacy: Reading the Sacred in Everyday Life. New York: Scribner.
Calleman, Carl (2004), The Mayan Calendar and the Transformation of Consciousness. Rochester VT: Bear & Co.
Choate, Adam, Dana Rowzee & Jerred Tinsley (2005), “CEO Pay Rates: U.S. vs. Foreign Nations.” URL: www.cab.latech.edu/~mkroll/510_papers/fall_05
Conforti, Michael (1999), Field, Form and Fate. New Orleans: Spring Journal Books.
Crombie, A.C. (1959), Medieval and Modern Science, I. Garden City NY: Doubleday.
Dante Aligheri (1961), Paradiso, trans. John Ciardi. New York: New American Library.
Edinger, Edward (1985), Anatomy of the Psyche: Alchemical Symbolism in Psychotherapy. Chicago & LaSalle IL: Open Court.
________ (1992), Ego and Archetype. Boston: Shambhala.
Fassel, Diane (1990), Working Ourselves to Death. San Francisco: Harper.
Gilbert, Adrian and Maurice Cotterell (1995), The Mayan Prophecies. New York: Barnes & Noble.
Gladwell, Malcolm (2003), The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference. Cleveland OH: Wheeler Publishing.
Hall, James A. (1983), Jungian Dream Interpretation. Toronto: Inner City Books.
Hannah, Barbara (1976), Jung: His Life and Work. New York: G.P. Putnam.
Harman, Willis (1988), Global Mind Change. Indianapolis: Knowledge Systems.
Harvey, Charles (2002), Anima Mundi: The Astrology of the Individual and the Collective. London: Centre for Psychological Astrology Press.
Jackson, Eve (1996), Food and Transformation: Imagery and Symbolism of Eating. Toronto: Inner City Books.
Jung, C. G. (1970), “Civilization in Transition,” Collected Works, 10. Princeton: Princeton University Press (hereafter listed as CW).
________ (1971), “Psychological Types,” CW 6. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1966), “Two Essays on Analytical Psychology,” CW 7. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1960), ”The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche,” CW 8. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1959), ”The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious,” CW 9i. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1970), “Civilization in Transition,” CW 10. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1969), “Psychology and Religion: West and East,” CW 11. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1953), “Psychology and Alchemy,” CW 12. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1967), “Alchemical Studies,” CW 13. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1963), “Mysterium Coniunctionis,” CW 14. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
________ (1974), Dreams. London: Ark Publications.
________ (1965), Memories, Dreams, Reflections. New York: Vintage Books.
________ (1958), The Undiscovered Self. New York: New American Library.
Keen, Sam (1992), “Dying Gods and Borning Spirits,” Noetic Sciences Review (Winter 1992).
Keirsey, David & Marilyn Bates (1984), Please Understand Me. Del Mar CA: Prometheus Nemesis Books.
Kristof, Nicholas (2008), “Talia For President,” The New York Times (November 16, 2008), 14WK.
Land, George (1986), Grow or Die: The Unifying Principle of Transformation. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
________ & Beth Jarman (1992), Breakpoint and Beyond: Mastering the Future Today. New York: Harper Collins.
Lewis, Bernard (2003), The Crisis of Islam. New York: Random House.
Mails, Thomas (1997), The Hopi Survival Kit. New York: Penguin Books.
Mander, Jerry (1991), In the Absence of the Sacred. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
Mattoon, Mary Ann (1984), Understanding Dreams. Dallas TX: Spring Publications.
McGeehan, Patrick (2004), “Masters of the Universe, Leashed (for Now),” The New York Times (July 18, 2004), 3WK.
Perkins, John (1994), The World Is As You Dream It. Rochester VT: Destiny Books.
Pinchbeck, Daniel (2006), 2012: The Return of Quetzalcoatl. New York: Tarcher/Penguin.
Schaef, Anne Wilson (1985), Women’s Reality: An Emerging Femaile System in a White Male Society. San Francisco: Harper.
______ & Diane Fassel (1988), The Addictive Organization. San Francisco: Harper.
Sharp, Daryl (1991), C.G. Jung Lexicon: A Primer of Terms & Concepts. Toronto: Inner City Books.
Stevens, Anthony (2003), Archetype Revisited: An Updated Natural History of the Self. Toronto: Inner City Books
Stray, Geoff (2005), Beyond 2012: Catastrophe or Ecstasy: A Complete Guide to End-of-Time Predictions. Lewes UK: Vital Signs Publishing.
Tarnas, Richard (2006), Cosmos and Psyche: Intimations of a New World View. New York: Viking.
Van Eenwyk, John (1997), Archetypes and Strange Attractors. Toronto: Inner City Books
von Franz, Marie-Louise (1980), Alchemy: An Introduction to the Symbolism and the Psychology. Toronto: Inner City Books.
________ (1997), Archetypal Patterns In Fairy Tales. Toronto: Inner City Books.
________ (1998), C.G. Jung: His Myth in Our Time. Toronto: Inner City Books.
________ (1998), Dreams. Boston: Shambhala.
Wagner, Suzanne (1998-1999), “A Conversation with Marie-Louise von Franz,” Psychological Perspectives, 38 (Winter 1998-1999), 12-39.
Waters, Frank (1963), Book of the Hopi. New York: Penguin Books.
Wolfe, Tom (1987), The Bonfire of the Vanities. New York: Bantam Books.
Woodman, Marion (1982), Addiction to Perfection. Toronto: Inner City Books.
________ (1993), Conscious Femininity. Toronto: Inner City Books
________ (1980), The Owl Was a Baker’s Daughter. Toronto: Inner City Books
________ (1985), The Pregnant Virgin. Toronto: Inner City Books
________ (1990), The Ravaged Bridegroom. Toronto: Inner City Books



]]>