Cable vs. Electronics: biggest bang for the buck

Cheers! to you too, 6ch....:0)

No Asa, you own me 3 cents. Otherwise, I will push it to a 500 posts thread. ;-)

Said above > As you know the Nazi party was more of a religious movement than a political movement.

All politics is religion…. or at least it has been up until now. Hitler relied, after all, on what were (and still are) primarily Christian prejudices and symbols (even as he disavowed them). The separation of church and state has been fought for here in the states for a short two centuries but anyone who follows this administration (Ashcroft) certainly understands that the two are still closely tied together. One nation under God….ect. The “oh so easy” separation of the two realms would have made Jung smile. (The one denied is the one in control.) In most of the rest of the world it is even more so. Our experiment with secular democracy is so short and fragile.

>Is Jung influenced by the occult ?

Of course!! Read his take on alchemy. It is not that he is “right” or “wrong.” (Mark will surely lecture on the mistaken assumptions underlying the duality of such an approach.) It is simply so amazing and fantastic a production!

IMHO there are few easy answers with Jung. I am going to say difficult things in very little space so you experts (Detlof) please excuse my layman’s simplifications and over generalizations.

He wrote his dissertation for his medical degree, “On the Psychology and Pathology of So-called Occult Phenomena”, about his 15 year old cousin, Helene Prieswerk, who claimed to be a medium. She claimed to be controlled by a variety of spirits. He attributed it to dissociation-multiple personalities. He was not so easily taken in.

Somewhat ironically, one of the more far fetched ideas (to modern western ears), synchronicity (you know.. the Sting Album …the idea that cause and effect are not so obvious and events are related in not so “common sense” ways), which sounds mystical-occultist to modern ears, was based on his collaboration with Wolfgang Pauli, a physicist. Many of his ideas came together during the second decade of this century. The first and second decades were very productive in completely overturning the rather mechanistic Newtonian view of the physical world. In a way the “common-sense” understanding of “reality” became “non-sense” at the cutting edge of “hard science.” I think Jung was influenced by this and believed that psychology would follow a similar path. At least he was certainly not afraid to think about and explore such things.

He was deeply interested in what we term the “occult” because he believed that western thought had overvalued thinking and undervalued its emotional/unconscious roots. In a simplified sense he believed certain aspects of thought became habitual and dominant and that without some balance troubles would follow. To almost any western reader he is going to seem to leave the known-plotted-intellectualized world far behind. Again, the second decade of the 20th century saw a war by “civilized-scientific” western Europe that, to say the least, showed the underbelly of “the dreams of reason.” He, in fact, believed he envisioned the war. Like him or not, his writing for about a half dozen years after 1913 , after his break with Freud as Detlof points out, and in a state of mind that would have put most of us in an asylum is, as they say, stranger than fiction…. and richer too.

This is not to excuse his obvious shortcomings. He was a man. His insights were great and his mistakes were great too. Hindsight is 20-20. Thomas Jefferson banged his negress slave half step-sister. The reverend M.L. King was rather “prolific” too. Is this cause for concern? Well…yes. Does it completely undermine their insight and life’s work? I don’t think so (another thread?). One of Jung’s better known ideas is that of the “shadow” and he certainly had his own….but to expect too much from those who walk here is adolescent folly. To expect nothing is fatalistic. But where to draw the line?

Least we forget as we judge Jung. The topic of this thread is a set of cables costing more than the annual gross family income of about half the folks on the planet who are hungry (slowly starving) as we speak. Of course, we have a political/economic ideology that justifies our excesses. Actually, it makes a Virtue of them (from necessity of course). I wonder what they will think of us 100 years from now. Please understand that I include myself in the last comment. I am not aiming it at anyone else... least of all you N’archy. I spend enough on vinyl to feed a small village.

If Jung failed somehow maybe I like him more for it. Compared to most of us he did not take the easy way. He struggled with it and for that I like him.

Sincerely
I remain,

Or is it "owe" ? ;-)

oh 6ch, and here I thought you got it: whack!! The sound of one hand clapping across with bamboo. :o)

3 cents, 500 posts, 123, 555678, 54.32? What is your Face?

:0) 3 :0) 500 :0) 123.......

On the Jung guys, the historical stuff, really enjoying it and learning some things too. Thanks for your efforts.

Clueless, our "experiement in secular democracy". Uh, I didn't know we'd had one yet...The "overturning" of the "Newtonian Mechanistic world". Uh, when did that happen? Yes, Jung confronted his "darkness" in many ways, and many ways not. What we need to see about Jung is that he saw deep into his own mind and, conversely, the collective. As you go deeper, the "darkeness" of, what Tibetans call, "difilements" increases. You have more "centered" consciousness in which to encounter that darkness (instinctual self) as it becomes darker. In this way, the "what is" - being so accommodating as it were - enables just enough center to handle each new way of darkness, Some waves Jung stood before, some he turned away from. When he stood - letting the darkness blow through him like wind - he saw things to tell us about; when he turned away, he rejoined the world of other-against-other. Like the existentialists, he looked "below" (ok, 6ch?) the thinking mind, seeing that he/we are something more, saw the archetypes, but did not see below them. Intuited his "ground", but ultimately defaulted to light/dark. This is the Path we all take, whether we know it or not. Jung injected into the collective mind a catalyst of thought based upon his visions - that karmic energy is still here in this moving thread....