Thread: Archetypes

Originally Posted by stormcrow

Joseph Campbell's book The Hero With a Thousand Faces focuses on the similarities between cultures rather than the differences. He claims that all myths from all parts of the world, share a common structure, which is the heroes journey. Carl Jung also found common themes in the dreams of cultures around the world. What are the implications of this discovery?

From my own experience, a bit of which I reveal in L&E, is that the human race is under some type of guidance from a superior intellect. Telepathy. Now, some call it God, some ET, all I know is that it is very real. I tend towards ET, the Universe is very old.

Some cannot imagine it because they cannot imagine a psychology much different from their own. As children vastly overrate themselves, so do we in general. I don't get too concerned about it because I see where we need to go, and we are a long way from it. What it can do, is not for us to rely on, it is what we have to do for ourselves.

I thought you would mention the Forms in some way like humans have innate knowledge of the Forms which would explain why different cultures have similar mythologies. Maybe the Forms ARE a type of divine knowledge (possibly from "ET's") that are guiding us in some way. I know there are people who believe that mathematics were given to us by an alien race, I don't believe this to be true but I think it is an interesting theory nonetheless.

Originally Posted by stormcrow

I thought you would mention the Forms in some way like humans have innate knowledge of the Forms which would explain why different cultures have similar mythologies. Maybe the Forms ARE a type of divine knowledge (possibly from "ET's") that are guiding us in some way. I know there are people who believe that mathematics were given to us by an alien race, I don't believe this to be true but I think it is an interesting theory nonetheless.

Form means form. Shape, boundary, limit, there is nothing mystical about that. Mathematics is not more than a collection of grammar systems.

As you dream, Jung believed that the first archetype you encounter is the Shadow; the strictly personal unconscious, containing all our memories and our dark, hidden, negative side. He believed that before you could freely access the Collective Unconscious in dreams, you first must come to terms with your Shadow and integrate those darker parts of the psyche into consciousness.

After the Shadow, he believed the next archetype you encounter is the Anima ("Soul") for men and the Animus ("Spirit") for women.

The Anima archetype is the tantalizingly beautiful image of femininity which exists inside every man; the spur in the heart that drives him forward, the apple of his eye. Jung called her the "image of my soul." Another poet named her "My Lady Soul."

The Animus is the image of enduring masculinity which exists in the mind of every woman; her idea of a 'soul mate', the dangerous fascination of her life.

The Anima soul-image first appears in the mind of man as his mother. The Animus first appears to a woman as her father. Later they are transferred to other people whom they find beautiful.

In many ways Jung felt that the Anima/Animus is the mediator of a person to the rest of his or her unconscious world.

Jung believed that the last archetype is the Self, or God, inside every person. This archetype represents the wholeness of the psyche, which the past cannot comprehend.

Carl Jung and Dreaming

I haven't seen any psychological studies done about these things, sadly enough.. In the scientific world, Jung and Freud's work are even considered to be non-theories, or even non-hypotheses because they can't be falsified, or even tested. There have been many other theories about sleep and dreams due to experiments in psychology and neuroscience, and they mention nothing of the archetypes, etc. As far as therapeutic value goes, standard cognitive behavioral therapy beats psychoanalysis consistently. So as it stands now, we can only call it elaborate speculation. With no basis in real life evidence, and when you call it an actual theory, the most you can elevate it to is merely the level of pseudo-science. Sadly, even the claims of Joseph Campbell and his monomyth are viewed as unlikely in the consented mainstream study of mythology. While there are common parallels in myths, the claim of one overarching structure can be called an over-generalization.

That doesn't make them less interesting, though. However, as far as it stands, we can only call them pseudosciences.

And as we all know, pseudoscience rarely has any actual implications for the real world.


FWIW,

Tim


Some things to look at that might be interesting nontheless:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dream#T...gy_of_dreaming
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dream#P...eep_and_dreams
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dream_i...ry_of_dreaming
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compara...ical_parallels
http://www.skepdic.com/collectiveun.html