User Tag List

First 123 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: Freud vs. Jung

  1. #11
    The Green Jolly Robin H.
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    1,683

    Default

    To elaborate on the above...

    Take the reason why wars are done today. We could say that most wars are fought over cultural ideology but in truth, based on actions of people, wars are fought for gold and resources, never for any other reason in terms of primary cause, or economic ideologies.

    So we have the scientific idea that resources are limited. A smart man says that there can only be so many balls in the box.

    Well guess what. The earth isn't a box. No one is certain if resources are limited or not. There could be an infinite amount of resources in the galaxy and the idea that resources are limited in absolute is as much superstition as Santa or a black cat crossing your path. Yet...it's excepted as a fact because in certain analogical situations we use the scientific method to demonstrate resources are limited.

    So then generals are sent to plunder for resources based on an ideology which is rooted in the scientific method.

    Are we to say that we are fighting wars now because of science or because we are humans and failing ourselves? The first part would be a Freudian thing, since frued himself was one of the many who unconsciously were of the religion scientism. Jung on the other hand removed himself and was honest and humble. He knew that science could not solve the problems of the world and therefore he realized that the individual must be accountable for evil, not any external locust which was simply a tool. He was humble because he was actually more of a scientist than Freud and this weakened his argument at the time, however he was right in assuming that it would strengthen his argument after he was dead and his legacy was left behind. Humility always trumps pride in the long run. Only the truly humble can serve humanity. Humility is a guardian.

    In fact in the first few pages of Man in Search of His Soul Jung makes the bold claim that anyone who is too religious, as in dogmatic, and anyone who is too scientific and leaves to room for mystery fall into the same type of traps and are actually very similar in nature. Only someone in the middle can individuate and become truly mature.

    Hence we have the old crusty man who disdains the imagination and who thinks he is mature but in truth is crusty and brings misery to every room. This in itself, crusty and morbid seriousness, should not be confused with maturity. Maturity is not killing the inner child but integrating it. This is an idea of Jung's. Integration brings maturity, not extremism.
    "i shut the door and in the morning
    it was open
    -the end"




    Olemn slammed his hammer and from the sparks on the metal of his anvil came the spheres of the heavens.

    Sayrah blew life into the spheres and they moved. From her wheel she weaved the names of people in to mystery.
    Likes Evee liked this post

  2. #12
    Senior Member cm81's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    714 sx/sp
    Socionics
    infj Ni
    Posts
    322

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GarrotTheThief View Post
    Freud:
    -Believed religion was psychopathic: the religious experience for him was a sign of mental disability
    -Analyzed people from the perspective of what is wrong with them
    -Believe that Carl Jung opposed him

    Jung
    -noticed patients who believed in an after-life enjoyed greater psychic function in late life so attributed health to the religious experience
    -analyzed people from the perspective of what works very well...asked what is healthy and worked from there since that was the only thing provable.
    -Believed that he was the natural evolution and/or co-dependent camp of thought to Adler and Freud

    Who wins?

    Notable Jungian - many renowned Nobel peace prize winners and creators such as George Lucas.

    It seems that these people are also Freudian though in the sense that they are Jungian. A jungian in other words is a freudian + much more where as a freudian is just a Freudian, he does not ascribe to Jung at all.

    Seems like Jung is a healthier view based on my opinion and experience. Freud seemed to be warped and projecting a lot of his own issues on to the matter. For example his notion of the id is inferior to Jung's notion of the unconscious in that Jung acknowledge several different forces of the unconscious where as Freud's id was a jarbled slew that averaged out to one force.
    He couldn't think past his feminine envies toward respectable conclusions; guy was a nut case.
    "The true genius shudders at incompleteness, preferring silence to everything that it should be." Edgar Allen Poe

    "There's a magic inside,
    Just waiting to burst out.
    There world is a goldmine-
    That will melt tomorrow."M83

  3. #13
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,526

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GarrotTheThief View Post
    This is why Freudian psychology is all but dead today and Jungian psychology is experience a rebirth.
    The cult of Carl Jung is reborn in a country that buys and sells Nazi memorabilia at very high prices, and which buys and sells guns at any price.

    What a combination: the Furhrer-lover Carl Jung, Nazi memorabilia, and a gun in every house.

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    INFp Ni
    Posts
    145

    Default

    The way I see it is that Freud said that Jung obviously had insert_complex_here because he was what he was, which pissed Jung off because he was obviously a functioning human being. Now I think the error was in Freud's criticism of people with these personality styles. He assumed people could not cope with them, while Jung said "Of course they can, I'm living proof!"

    Probably wrong because of the lack of research devoted to the subject.

    I've started to turn away from Jung though. Freud's theories are more practical, and I like practical. Jung's theories suffer from fitting facts to the theory. I'll likely come back with my own theory given enough time though that builds upon everything.

  5. #15
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,526

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alomoes View Post
    The way I see it is that Freud said that Jung obviously had insert_complex_here because he was what he was, which pissed Jung off because he was obviously a functioning human being. Now I think the error was in Freud's criticism of people with these personality styles. He assumed people could not cope with them, while Jung said "Of course they can, I'm living proof!"
    Rather than being a functioning human being, Carl Jung failed his psychoanalysis with Sigmund Freud, sexually abused his female patients, became a florid psychotic, became a passionate follower of the Fuhrer, and supported the SS Death Head Cult.

    So it is no surprise to find that the followers of Carl Jung today support the current Cult of Death we read about in our newspapers and see on our TVs every day.

  6. #16
    The Green Jolly Robin H.
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    1,683

    Default

    You guys seem to forget that if we look at what is more successful today, it is depth psychology, or Jungian styled psychoanalysis.

    Freud said that if you had an Oedipus complex you were sick.

    Jung said it was how you deal with the Oedipus complex which determines if you are sick not the fact that you have it since every human has a relationship with their parents, all humans have a complex which is called and Oedipus complex. Even not having an Oedipus complex in the traditional sense is still within the parameters of having one, even speaking non-dualistically.

    So Jung is actually more practical than Freud. The idea of an ID for example, is just entirely false. There is not a single unconscious drive. Furthermore Jung studied people from all countries and all cultures. Freud only worked within a small frame work of humanity.

    Jung was also more objective in this regard. He was able to compare indigenous people who were undisturbed by modern civilization for 1,000's of years and find how they were just like us and draw deeper conclusions regarding the human psyche than Freud.

    Remember,. we do no simply have what Freud called a drive for sex. We have a drive for power and we have a drive for other things as well. This was Jung's contribution to psychoanalysis not Freud. Freud believed your sole axis of existence was procreation which is clearly false since people live for other things. I mean it's right in front of our faces as Jung said, the human does not live for the same reasons most animals who are unaware of their existence do. To say so would be to deny the very basic objective evidence of the fact that people simply do not, by their own admission, and by their action, live for procreation alone.

    In fact...people tend to live more for power, than procreation. The argument is that people want power for procreation and procreation is central which is again proven false. There are many people who live for power and do not procreate so such a statement would be like believing in the tooth fairy.

    Finally, Jung emphasized the existence of the psyche as more than the sum total of drives coming from the parts of our brain and body. He was the first person in psychology to notice that we experience our existence as a unified whole and not a series of cells.

    When you think, you do not think as a finer, as an adrenal gland, you think as a unified person. This is what he refers to as the psyche, a unified whole.

    Freud on the other hand said that you were just the parts you were made of. Again reductionist is flattering in the short run because it helps us understand the world but as a belief system it is simply untrue. Not a single thing can be reduced to a level of unyielding certainty. If you reduce a chair to it's atoms you still do not know what make up atoms beyond the level of the frontier of scientific measurement with regards to quantum. And no person will ever reach that depth. We will get deeper, and deeper, but never to the bottom of what makes up anything really.

    Jung knew this. Freud did not. I suspect Freud would have known more if he had not dipped his nose into the angel dust, but cocaine will corrode your logic processors beyond a certain point of practical functioning.
    "i shut the door and in the morning
    it was open
    -the end"




    Olemn slammed his hammer and from the sparks on the metal of his anvil came the spheres of the heavens.

    Sayrah blew life into the spheres and they moved. From her wheel she weaved the names of people in to mystery.

  7. #17
    I could do things Hard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Enneagram
    1w2 sp/so
    Socionics
    EIE Fe
    Posts
    7,977

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mole View Post
    So it is no surprise to find that the followers of Carl Jung today support the current Cult of Death we read about in our newspapers and see on our TVs every day.
    This is just rediculous. Cult of Death? LOL! This is nothing more than you linking your hatred of various cultures with your hatred of Jung simply because it suits you.
    MBTI: ExxJ tetramer
    Functions: Fe > Te > Ni > Se > Si > Ti > Fi > Ne
    Enneagram: 1w2 - 3w4 - 6w5 (The Taskmaster) | sp/so
    Socionics: β-E dimer | -
    Big 5: slOaI
    Temperament: Choleric/Melancholic
    Alignment: Lawful Neutral
    External Perception: Nohari and Johari


  8. #18
    Senior Member Passacaglia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    647

    Default

    Is this like a Brittney Spears vs. Miley Cyrus popularity contest? Kinda confused on why there needs to be a 'versus' in the discussion.

    I'm not deeply educated in either one, though I did write a paper about Jung in high school. Interesting stuff, though it's all very hazy in my memory now. Freud had a few nutty ideas -- penis envy, anyone? -- but then, many trailblazers are remembered for the things they got wrong rather than the things they got right. I think Jung's ideas about archetypes and religion are interesting, but I also think that humanity will eventually progress to the point where religion more-or-less fades away completely. Assuming we don't destroy ourselves first.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mole View Post
    ...the Furhrer-lover Carl Jung
    Citation, please?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mole View Post
    ...Nazi memorabilia
    ...?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mole View Post
    ...and a gun in every house.
    I'm not sure what the percentages are, but I can assure you, there's not nearly a gun in every U.S.A. house.

  9. #19
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,526

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Passacaglia View Post
    I'm not sure what the percentages are, but I can assure you, there's not nearly a gun in every U.S.A. house.
    I understand there are as many guns is civilian hands in the USA as civilians, even though the Right to Bear Arms is not, and never will be, included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

  10. #20
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,526

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Passacaglia View Post
    Is this like a Brittney Spears vs. Miley Cyrus popularity contest? Kinda confused on why there needs to be a 'versus' in the discussion.
    It's a moral choice. Do you choose Sigmund Freud the Jew who was driven out of his home and his extended family murdered by the Fuhrer and his SS Death Head Cult, or do you choose Carl Jung the Aryan who adored the Fuhrer as as a father figure and supported the SS Death Head Cult by following the orders of Reich Marshall Hermann Goering?

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-25-2015, 08:14 PM
  2. Freud or Jung?
    By Julius_Van_Der_Beak in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 08-13-2013, 10:27 AM
  3. Freud/Jung's Type
    By heart in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 133
    Last Post: 04-02-2012, 12:03 AM
  4. Jung Vs. Freud
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 09-03-2010, 07:09 PM
  5. Freud and Jung
    By Mole in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 68
    Last Post: 08-07-2008, 03:33 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO