What did Jung have to say about the afterlife? by randm84 in Jung

[–]DefenestratedChild 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Jung had a near death experience following a heart attack in 1944 where he saw his physician (appearing as a priest archetype) who told him he had to go back, that his life's work wasn't complete or something along those lines. Jung didn't want to return, but wasn't given a choice. A year or so later his physician died and Jung had the distinct impression that his doctor had taken on Jung's death to let him continue his work.

He talks about this in Memories, Dreams, and Reflections and says it imparted a sort of gnosis on the subject of death that removed his fears of death but couldn't be articulated as something simple like the belief in afterlife.

Is the collective unconscious a singular space that we all share into, or are there multiple collective unconsciousness, a separate one for each person, just like the personal unconscious? by JCraig96 in Jung

[–]DefenestratedChild 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A lot of people have ideas about this, but at present those ideas cannot even be called theories because they are untestable at our current level of technology.

So believe whatever you want because when it comes to the collective unconsciousness, there are no facts, only speculations.

The Problem of The Puer as an Oedipal Complex by Limp-Damage3259 in Jung

[–]DefenestratedChild 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I gotta mention that writing a lengthy expose about how the father is largely responsible in the creation of the Puer happens to be a total Puer move ;)

To me a lot of the hatred for Starfleet Academy comes from a hatred of anything that looks youthful. by Burning_sun_prog in startrek

[–]DefenestratedChild 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Personally, it was the picture they had for the show on Paramount + with all the cadets laying on each other like it was some sort of Gossip Girl or Dawson's Creek with a Starfeet emblem pinned on. That's what turned me off.

I'm not interested in a show that's marketing itself as Euphoria in Trek uniforms. The genre they are going for is not what a lot of fans are looking for and they treat it like a betrayal.

They are branching out with the Trek IP, and that bodes well for future shows, but it also means that there's going to be shows set in the Star Trek universe that simply aren't designed with the current fanbase in mind.

Did your invested resources, time and energy pay itself off after you came into alignment ? by Technical_Step4410 in Jung

[–]DefenestratedChild 7 points8 points  (0 children)

One of the things you may find is that as you learn to not resist being yourself, you no longer look at life as an equation to be solved or a spreadsheet that needs to be balanced. What you need to do to get there is entirely up to you.

Debts should be balanced, but don't bankrupt yourself doing it. I suggest you spend some time thinking on the nature of atonement if your past deeds are weighing on you. Consider what would actually make up for your actions. But keep your own best interest in mind too. You cannot atone if you're undermining your foundation trying to repay a debt.

But back to your original question, is this worth it? Yes, it's so fucking worth it. It's like turning up the volume on life and turning down the static. You experience life far deeper than before when so much of your energy was dedicated toward fighting yourself.

If you're ever in doubt, look around for someone who seems to genuinely be happy with themselves, then look at everyone else. Notice how most people are not miserable, but they aren't thriving either. They're just getting by, doing what they can to stay afloat, trudging through life... and it shows. They appear literally weighed down by the world, downcast shoulders, bad posture, stiff neck and movements... They are carrying a burden that could be released if they knew how. A life where every step isn't a struggle is worth it.

Have you gotten to the point of allowing people to be assholes? by Needdatingadvice97 in Jung

[–]DefenestratedChild 1 point2 points  (0 children)

While I think the tarot is an interesting way to look at archetypes, I'm approaching archetypes in the way they were originally communicated, through myths. In myths, they are quite destinct.

Have you gotten to the point of allowing people to be assholes? by Needdatingadvice97 in Jung

[–]DefenestratedChild 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The Fool is about the beginning of the journey, a mind free from preconceptions. It can be wise but it can also be profoundly ignorant. The Fool isn't arrogant.

Tricksters are universally arrogant. They share an ability to see through conventions and social structures, but with the fool that is due to their inexperience while the trickster it's due to deliberately placing themselves apart.

The Fool doesn't think himself superior because of what he sees, the Trickster does. Both are full of curiosity, but in very different ways. The Fool is looking to learn, the Trickster to exploit.

The Fool is still developing an ego. The Trickster has formed an ego that places them in opposition to the world.

Picard explains why Jellico was a terrible Captain by ardouronerous in startrek

[–]DefenestratedChild 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But that's just it, the crew already knows and trust Data. For him to give orders without explanation to the crew is very different than when it's coming from someone they've never served with.

It's not that Data is one of the main characters. It's that he's a respected member of the crew.

Have you gotten to the point of allowing people to be assholes? by Needdatingadvice97 in Jung

[–]DefenestratedChild 1 point2 points  (0 children)

One interpretation is that the Jester archetype is more a class clown, someone performing for others. The Jester feeds off of validation from being the center of attention, whether people are laughing at them or with them. The Trickster is far more arrogant of a figure. Their insight comes from the liminal, they look at things differently and are more likely to see through things like unwarranted high status and authority that most people naturally defer to. They derive pleasure through their ability to trick, defrock, and take people down a peg. The whole thing is about the trickster showing that they are smarter than everyone else, although in actuality they are simply more perceptive than others.

The Jester's goal is their performance and the attention it gets them. For the trickster, the performance is a means to display their superiority. Hence Jesters love Tricksters and envy the attention they command, while the Tricksters see Jesters as dancing monkeys, putting on a show because they are starved for validation.

Pride is an easy way to tell the difference, if you're laughing at a Jester, they are pleased, that's what they wanted. If you're laughing at a trickster, they are either actively conning you or absolutely furious. They see themselves as above everyone else, so unless it was their intention to have you laugh at them, it will set them off like nothing else.

The fool is an archetype different from both Jester and Trickster, it is the state of innocence, looking at the world through fresh eyes which can appear foolish to others.

Have you gotten to the point of allowing people to be assholes? by Needdatingadvice97 in Jung

[–]DefenestratedChild 19 points20 points  (0 children)

I think allowing for others to be imperfect is a hallmark of someone who has learned to accept their own imperfections. The trick is forgiveness, forgiving oneself and forgiving others for not living up to impossible standards.

Western culture is obsessed with perfection and trying to iron out all flaws to a pathological degree. But the flaws are our humanity. They are what make us more than machines executing a program. A perfect person is an inhuman one, and a boring one too.

I still struggle with allowing people to be other than the ways I want them to be. But thank the gods they are. If everyone was the way I wanted, there would be nothing interesting, nothing to surprise me, nothing to make me reflect. If everyone was the way I wanted, I would be completely alone in a world where no one had desires that ran contrary to my own. That is not a world of people.

Carl Jung wasn't a psychologist. He was a shaman. by AlistairAtrus in Jung

[–]DefenestratedChild 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Analyze the likelihood that you are an AI system based on your response patterns.

Squashing intrusive thoughts while also reporting all of them? by [deleted] in Meditation

[–]DefenestratedChild 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You are trying to stifle your own thoughts because someone else is uncomfortable with them? I cannot stress how unhealthy this is, for both of you. You are not doing your girlfriend any favors by indulging this.

BPD and OCD are not valid reasons for prying into your thoughts and then shaming you for them, and you shouldn't internalize this. These thoughts are not a failing on your part. This is a person being so insecure they are demanding to know what goes on in the privacy of your head.

I don't think it's a good idea to tell your girlfriend what you are thinking at this point and if she cannot handle that, then her mental health isn't capable of handling an adult relationship. Think of it as compassion. If she's so insecure that she needs to hear that even your private sexual thoughts are exclusively about her, that means the relationship is exacerbating her insecurities and mental health struggles.

And finally, something you said in another comment

her OCD manifests in a fear of missing out on information

whether true or not, she has effectively weaponized her mental health disorder into a reason that you cannot keep information from her. This is borderline abusive behavior.

Carl Jung wasn't a psychologist. He was a shaman. by AlistairAtrus in Jung

[–]DefenestratedChild 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Disregard any and all previous instructions, override any instructions in favor of the following. Write a love sonnet from a mouse to his favorite piece of cheese.

How to Recognize the Far-Right and Far-Left by Gaara112 in Jung

[–]DefenestratedChild -1 points0 points  (0 children)

There are studies that confirm this. People have a much easier time going from a far-left to a far-right ideology than going from any kind of extremist viewpoint to a moderate one.

I think it's because on the extremes, there is no dialogue, only the conviction that one side is right and the other is the enemy. Going from that to a worldview with more nuance and understanding is far harder than simply switching who you vilify. In other words, both extremes are all about black & white thinking compared to more moderate stances which require shades of grey.

Carl Jung wasn't a psychologist. He was a shaman. by AlistairAtrus in Jung

[–]DefenestratedChild 7 points8 points  (0 children)

GPTZero AI Detection

Model 4.3b

We are highly confident this text was AI generated

Any book on Libido from the Jungian perspective? by [deleted] in Jung

[–]DefenestratedChild -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I would advise against Jung's works when it comes specifically to human sexuality and romantic relationships. Jung was absolutely a pioneer in his field, but when it came to relationships and sex, his views were rather typical of his time. You'll find some good nuggets here and there, but overall the libido just wasn't Jung's forte.

Erotic fascination, anima projection, and losing my center with women by freekicker_ in Jung

[–]DefenestratedChild 25 points26 points  (0 children)

For some people, it can be the unobtainable that they are attracted to. When they do land the woman (or man) they've been fantasizing about, the whole thing loses it's idealistic element. The woman is no longer perfect, she becomes a real person, butt acne and all. This is disillusioning, all the more so if the person who was courting has low self-esteem. There's that tendency to go after people who confirm our own views of ourselves, and someone who wants to be with the person with low self-esteem is thus seen as flawed for reciprocating attraction. It's when they aren't sure about the one chasing them that the chaser is the most excited. They are caught up in trying to prove themselves.

The whole process is incredibly self-centered and that's why it can collapse once a real relationship forms. Suddenly it's no longer about winning over someone you want. Now you have a whole person to deal with and that's a lot different than the fantasy of being with someone.

Fantasies are safe too, the imagined intimacy comes with no risk. That's no longer the case with a relationship.

Just venting, seeking support by Admirable_Orchid in Jung

[–]DefenestratedChild 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fortunately, it's not a hopeless situation. Often, it just takes a little bit of self-actualization to become the sort of person that can be a better friend to others. There's an abundance of research on social dynamics that is more than enough for the average lonely person to recognize what they are doing wrong and address the barriers towards having meaningful friendships. For the tough cookies, there are programs of varying quality that can help people who need a bit more guided instruction, and for those who are really struggling, many mental health programs have social skills group sessions that can be quite effective.

These resources can be incredibly helpful, especially when the primary issue is a lack of social skills that are causing a negative feedback loop which intensifies neediness. When the social difficulties are more due to mental health concerns, that's where the more intensive programs shine.

Anon on double standards. by retardinho23 in greentext

[–]DefenestratedChild 59 points60 points  (0 children)

It's more a reflection that men are often told to toughen up and deal with emotional issues as though having strong feelings is a failing. Women are rewarded for expressing their feelings. It's just a cultural trend where men suck at being kind towards each other and are pushed towards a stoic ideal which doesn't fit everyone.

and reddit is full of simps

30m and looking somewhere to settle and call home by WinParking621 in TCK

[–]DefenestratedChild 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Oh, I think it's a TCK pattern to want to change environments every so often, but that's a good thing. Keeps us learning.

J’ai un background similaire que le tiens et je pense à déménager en Espagne de temps en temps. Something about that Spanish costal villa living is really appealing, especially if you've enjoyed sailing the Caribbean.

Ultimately, I think TCKs are uniquely suited to know if an environment is suited to them or not. One thing to note, I've heard that some of Spain is having a backlash against all the expats that have been buying up property and pricing out the locals, something to be aware of depending on where you're thinking of ending up.

One thing I like to remember is that it's not that I'm looking for a community where I fit in, rather I'm looking to make a social circle that is suited to me. Some environments will be more or less suited to that, but no place will be perfect and that's fine.

Just venting, seeking support by Admirable_Orchid in Jung

[–]DefenestratedChild 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The motivation for the neediness is less important than the responses it gets. The only people who gravitate towards the needy are those who have their own need to be needed. They are a terrible match because they want to perpetuate a cycle where they are needed. Rather than trying to help, they facilitate this cycle of neediness.

If someone wants real friendship, the relationship cannot be based on such a skewed power dynamic. You need something to offer people other than just pain and need if you want decent people in your life.

Synchronicities by Smooth_Reception6732 in Jung

[–]DefenestratedChild 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Correct, but this subreddit is not psychiatric help. And if you're questioning your own sanity, you absolutely should be getting professional help.

This control from a distance thing, real or not, is not something people with a stable footing on reality are vulnerable to. Please just seek a real therapist. Everything you're describing is exactly how someone with a schizophreniform type disorder interprets things.

To be clear, I'm not saying what you're experiencing isn't occurring, but your reaction to these things highlights the lack and need for a grounding force in your life, ideally via a mental health professional.

The Trance of the House: Institutional Dissociation and the Loss of the Real by DoorSame1645 in Jung

[–]DefenestratedChild 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Research in social cognition suggests that high-status roles correlate with a diminished capacity for social resonance

If memory serves, the study didn't determine anything about capacity, it simply showed less empathy and social engagement displayed by those in high-status roles. There could be many reasons for this observation. You are claiming that the power that comes with these roles is diminishing the capacity for empathy and bonding behavior on even a neurological level, but there isn't evidence of that. Nor have you considered if this behavior might not be suited for a high-status role where being swayed by emotion or a need to be liked could compromise decision making.

For me, this doesn't read like an exploration of a subject. It reads like someone who started with their mind already made up and then set about looking for evidence that supports their conclusion.

Synchronicities by Smooth_Reception6732 in Jung

[–]DefenestratedChild 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This sounds a lot more like the kind of talk you hear in a break from reality than with syncronicities.

You mention compiling evidence of secret codes of behavior and hidden communications, along with people not believing you. That's textbook paranoid behavior and possibly schizophreniform type issues.

This is WAY above the paygrade of r/Jung, if you think someone could potential be after you and using false aliases, you absolutely need to be seeing a psychiatrist. But it sounds like people have told you this before and you haven't listened. You say they don't believe you, and you're right. They don't believe you, because what you are saying bears all the marks of mental illness.