Theos-Talk Archives (March 1999 Message tt00153)

Mar 15th

Regarding Jung and his views. Did he ever conceive of an immortal
Ego within the personal Self ?  What responsibility did it assume
for the directing of the life and choices of individuals?

What and how was the ethical nature of man the actor considered ?

Why do people get hailed into Court?  What is a crime ?  and who
dos it ?

Dal

--------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From:	owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com
[mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com] On Behalf Of Mark
Kusek
Sent:	Monday, March 15, 1999 4:09 PM
To:	theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject:	Re: Theos-World Deities & Archetypes



Gerald Schueler wrote:

> >>Jerry, my sense is that latter day Jungian psychology has
> contributed
> a great deal to 'personalising' impersonal forces / archetypes.
I
> notice how following this tradition people start 'people-ing'
their
> 'inner world' with all kinds of archetypes (so called).  All of
them
> tend to be very human personifications, and at times even sub
human.
> It's a bit like there has been a withdrawal of the 'projection'
onto
> the
> divine but only to continue in another form.  For example - my
> magician,
> my wise man / woman, my warrior & so on, & so on.  What is your
take
> on
> this?
> Regards,
> Peter>>
>
> Peter, I have always believed that the external gods and
goddesses
> have
> as much reality (no more and no less) that the internal
archetypes.
> The
> archetypes are impersonal. But when they are constellated
(activated
> in
> someone) then they speak through symbols, and those symbols
can,
> indeed,
> be taken personally. Jung called the personal interpretation of
a
> symbol, a sign and carefully distinguished the two.
>
> That people today personalize the archetypes is no different
than our
> ancestors who personalized the gods and goddesses. This is
wrong, yet
> very human.
>
> Jerry S.

Jerry,

I would question also, whether it is even possible to consciously
perceive an archetypal symbol in action upon us, (whether from
within or
without) without personalizing it into a sign, by Jung's
definition. I
don't believe that we have a conscious relationship with the
archetypes
but through such a personal interpretation. That makes it a
unique
experience for each person, and by extensdion each cultural group
(through agreement and traditionalization - although there is
always
subjectivization within cultural understanding) and thus aids in
the
individuation process.

It's the understanding of the difference among any particular
signs and
the commonality of the underlying archetype that humanizes and
breeds
both brotherhood and compassion. Would you agree?

Mark


-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk --
theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting
of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.


-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.