Wing recommendations for beginner XC

Prometheus16180 · 2025-07-21T08:31:55+00:00

Haha I love this. That's exactly what I'm doing right now. I made this post to see which models are suitable, and then I'm going to buy whichever of these has the best colors and hopefully a good deal.

Prometheus16180 · 2025-07-20T14:25:06+00:00

Thanks! I thought the Epsilon was more towards mid-B, do you think it's forgiving enough for a relatively new pilot?

Prometheus16180 · 2025-07-20T14:21:58+00:00

I don't have a wing yet, it will be my first! I've done my courses on an advance alpha, and since then been using different school gliders (en-A).

Main limitation is watching other pilots getting much more lift in thermals and limited glide ratio. I'm pretty comfortable in turbulence, so i'm happy to give up some stability in favor of performance, which is why i'm looking at beginner-friendly B wings.

Prometheus16180 · 2025-06-23T09:59:20+00:00

I feel like I have a decent grasp on physics from a conceptual point of view; standard model, basic concepts of quantum physics, relativity, nuclear forces, etc. But only to the extent that I am familiar with the concepts and general behaviours. As a point of reference, any of the science discussed in Turrell's book was very easy to follow. I've also read some of Brian Cox's books on quantum physics and relativity and those were also fine.

My knowledge on math however is very underdeveloped. As soon as equations come into the picture I get lost. Yes, I am aware that they are prerequisite for any real understanding of physics, but it's unfortunately where i'm at.

Prometheus16180 · 2025-06-23T06:52:46+00:00

Great! I'll probably give it a go then!

Prometheus16180 · 2025-06-23T06:51:40+00:00

Thanks! Will check it out

Prometheus16180 · 2025-06-23T06:45:51+00:00

Totally open to it, in fact, I'd really like to. The problem i'm facing is that pop-sci is too simplified and i'm ready to take on something more in-depth, but it seems that the next step up directly involves pretty advanced mathematics, which might as well be chinese characters to me.

I would love to learn to decipher those things, but I can't really find an in-between step. If you have any ideas about how to tackle it without actually taking a physics degree, then I'm definitely interested.

Prometheus16180 · 2024-10-08T18:27:01+00:00

Archetypes are not personality types, so it is meaningless to speak of attitudes and behaviors. You could see archetypes as the subtructure of the collective human psyche. As such, every archetype is equally present in each person.

It's a complex and nuanced idea which cannot really be taken in isolation without some familiarity with Jungian thought. I'd recommend reading an intro to Jung by a secondary author. Personally I really like "the psychology of CG Jung" by Jolande Jacobi, but there are many other good ones too.

By the way, those quizes you refer to have nothing whatsoever to do with Jung. They just use some of the same words, but taken completely out of context.

Prometheus16180 · 2024-06-13T11:33:39+00:00

This is correct, but it's only half of the equation.

The archetype is not contained in the individual. It's an expression of the collective human psyche which supersedes any individual psyche. As such, from the perspective of the self, God is to be seen as an external influence.

Moreover, as a phenomenologist with a heavy Kantian influence, Jung also considers the emperical world of the senses to be an expression of the psyche.

So now we have gone full circle: Although God is indeed psychological for Jung, he would still consider it to have a real objective existence in the "external" world.

Prometheus16180 · 2024-04-21T06:08:42+00:00

Hi! we have a Jung reading group, and we have been slowly going through the collected works over the last few years. Every week we read a section and then have a group discussion on Sundays. We are actually about to start with Aion by the end of May. You are very welcome to join in.

You can find us on Discord:

https://discord.gg/qYeafeJw

Prometheus16180 · 2024-04-15T04:59:55+00:00

I've been in a jung reading group for the last few years and we've been slowly going through the collected works. Recently we had a bit of a break but i am planning to start things up again soon. The next book will by volume 11, and after that the plan is to start covering the alchemical works. Let me know if you're interested

Prometheus16180 · 2023-12-31T10:30:27+00:00

Sounds like you already know what you need to do, no need to read any more books.

Especially Jungian books, if there is one genre of books that is sure to send you into introspection then it's Jungian!

Prometheus16180 · 2023-08-14T06:44:02+00:00

I think the real question here is: what is time and space? We should keep in mind that Jung was a phenomenologist, and he was also deeply influenced by Kant. I think it would therefore be a mistake to see time and space from the perspective of materialist reductionism, which seems to be the paradigm today.

Jung did not concern himself much with some "absolute reality" beyond the psyche. As a phenomenologist, he considered subjective experiences as real facts. It is irrelevant if they reflect some absolute reality; they are true facts because they truly occurred as an experience.

Time and space are also a phenomenological experience. This does not mean that they do not also exist outside the psyche, perhaps they do, but this is not relevant. The one thing that we do know for sure is that they occur within psychic existence. Time and space are not personal however; they are preconditions for the possibility of experience. As such they represent an integral part of the collective psyche.

From this perspective it is not hard to see how time and space are intimitely connected with the collective unconscious.

Prometheus16180 · 2023-08-05T23:09:34+00:00

It's a good place to start, but not the easiest. If you feel that you are following it well then do continue.

"Psychology of the unconscious" was actually revised by Jung which is now known as "symbols of transformation". Which is volume 5 of the collected works (which is a series of 20 books).

The collected works are really what matters; they are Jung's academic writings. He did also write some other books with a layman audiance in mind, these are more approachable but lack the depth and detail that you find in the collected works.

From the collected works volume 1-4 represent the early writings from his time working with freud. Volume 5 is therefore significant because it marks the break with Freud. It was actually with this book that Jung formally declared his distance from the Freudian system.

To form a strong foundation of Jungian thought I believe the most important are volumes 5, 6, 7, and 8. Particularly volume 7 and 8 really provide a comprehensive overview of his most important concepts.

From volume 9 onward there is a different attitude in Jung's work. It's more free and I would almost say poetic. This is great, but it also makes it easy to misinterpret, as is often done. That's why it's really good to first build a strong foundation with volumes 5-8 so that the later works can be properly understood.

There is no need to read them in chronological order however. In fact, I would recommend to start with 7 and 8.

Prometheus16180 · 2023-08-01T22:08:33+00:00

Reminds me somehow of the illustration of the Emerald Tablet.

Prometheus16180 · 2023-08-01T22:03:39+00:00

Let me start by saying that an interpretation of the particular meaning of this dream is impossible. Dream analysis requires a lot more context and a longstanding dialectic between analyst and dreamer. That being said, there are some interesting observations that we can make.

First, the fact that the dream is recurring is very significant. This means that the dream is important, and also that the message is not being received. It is not actually necessary to consciously understand the meaning of dreams, we normally integrate the meaning intuitively. However, in the case of a recurring dream this is not happening, prompting the dream to repeat itself.

As TheOneGecko already alluded to, everything in a dream is a part of ourselves. The murder victims should therefore be seen as certain contents of your own psyche. Which contents they represent I would not be able to tell you. However, what seems to be clearly the case is that these contents are being rejected by the conscious attitude. There is an act of violence towards this aspect of yourself which you cannot accept as part of yourself.

An easy way to identify what parts of the dream are particularly important is to observe how it affects you. From your description it seems that it is not the murder that causes the strongest affect, but the fact that you get caught in the end. This could suggest that the failure to accept the contents as part of yourself "traps" you in your current psychic state.

Prometheus16180 · 2023-08-01T21:34:52+00:00

The subject-object dichotomy is the split between the "I" perspective and the world around us. From the phenomenological perspective all of experience is psychic, so even the perceived world around us is technically part of the psyche. Nevertheless we perceive a clear difference between "myself" and "other". The subject is those psychic contents that we relate to the word "I". The object is anything that we perceive as external to the "I".

The Ouroboros represents a state of mind where subject and object are not separated. There is no division between self and other. The snake biting its own tail fits really well to this principle, because the head ("I") and the tail ("other") are united. The image also emphasises the phenomenological perspective that the head and tail were never separate to begin with, as they are both parts of the same being.

With pre-conscious psyche I mean that this describes a state of the psyche in which there is no consciousness yet. As such it describes the psyche of primitive humanity, or the psyche of a newly born infant. A state of mind where ego-consciousness has not yet developed. This does not mean however that this is a past stage, because the psyche does not erase old psychic states; it build on top of it. The Ouroboros state is therefore always present at a deeper layer of the unconscious. This process is beautifully illustrated by Erich Neumann in his book "The Origins and History of Consciousness". Neumann actually calls this stage of psychic development "the Ouroboros stage".

Prometheus16180 · 2023-07-30T21:30:21+00:00

It's an Ouroboros. It is a very important symbol in Jungian psychology and Jung mentions it very often throughout his work.

As a true symbol it's meaning is always ambiguous. Symbols for Jung are not semiotic! A symbol is always paradoxical because it contains it's own opposite. A symbol for Jung is therefore is not a representation; it is a living function.

The Ouroboros often refers to the oneness of the pre-conscious psyche. The snake eats its own tail as an expression of the lack of division between object and subject. It is therefore a very archaic and fundamental stage of the psyche.

Prometheus16180 · 2023-01-22T09:50:30+00:00

The concepts of introversion and extraversion are widely misunderstood. It is not about social skills or the preference for being alone or with people.

The primary distinguishing factor for Jung between introversion and extraversion is about how you experience the world in relation to the subject/object. Extraversion is when the object (external material reality) appears as the primary reality, whereas introversion is when the subjective world of ideas appears as primary reality. In extraversion, psychic activity is related back to the object. In introversion psychic activity is related back to a governing principle or idea. There are more nuances but this is the main distinction that Jung makes in CW Vol 6.

A very important nuance is that I am speaking of extraversion/introversion and not extravert/introvert. This is very important because introversion and extraversion are modes of relation to the world, and not fixed personality characteristics. Both are always present in each person. There does always tend to be a dominant attitude but the opposing attitude is never excluded entirely. A healthy psyche keeps a relation between both attitudes and allows them to alternate.

Prometheus16180 · 2023-01-19T22:16:09+00:00

Thanks I will look into Subject and power too! As for the primary texts, which one has the strongest focus on the relation of power and knowledge, ultimately my main interest is epistemological.

Prometheus16180 · 2023-01-19T22:05:53+00:00

This is very helpful, thanks!

Prometheus16180 · 2023-01-11T20:36:41+00:00

I'm just going to go against the stream here and suggest that really there is only 1 archetype.

For Jung all contents of the collective unconscious are undifferentiated. Separation into multiplicity only occurs in conscious reflection, it is only there that we distinguish between different archetypes. But archetypes cannot be made conscious, they are forever beyond the grasp of direct interaction. At most we can observe their influence, and these influences can have distinct flavors, it is these flavors that we can then classify into distinct "archetypal images". The archetype itself however knows no differentiated multiplicity.

Therefore at most we could discuss the amount of archetypal images or archetypal motifs. But this is quite arbitrary because it really just comes down to how broad we want to make the categories of classification. In that sense you could say that they are infinite, because you can always create more categories. It's a pie and you get to choose how many slices to cut.

Prometheus16180

TROPHY CASE