The March Philosophy Book of the Month is Final Notice by Van Fleisher. Discuss Final Notice now.

The April Philosophy Book of the Month is The Unbound Soul by Richard L. Haight. Discuss The Unbound Soul Now

The May Philosophy Book of the Month is Misreading Judas by Robert Wahler.

Intelligence and Jung

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"); such homework-help-style questions can be asked and answered on PhiloPedia: The Philosophy Wiki. If your question is not already answered on the appropriate PhiloPedia page, then see How to Request Content on PhiloPedia to see how to ask your informational question using the wiki.
User avatar
Hereandnow
Posts: 2269
Joined: July 11th, 2012, 9:16 pm
Favorite Philosopher: the moon and the stars

Re: Intelligence and Jung

Post by Hereandnow » November 11th, 2018, 1:10 pm

BG: I think you mean to say "Does NOT fit with this." Husserl is complaining a bit about Descartes failure to see the full depth of what the cogito is. See his Ideas for what HE thinks can be said about the structure of the cogito that can be laid out. The absolute (absolutes are analytically "eternal and unchanging". That is what it is to be an absolute) I say Husserl embraces is the transcendental ego, and there is simply no doubt whatsoever that he argues for this. None; he says it outright many, many times.

User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3037
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Intelligence and Jung

Post by Burning ghost » November 11th, 2018, 2:11 pm

That doesn’t appear to be his last word on the matter. It is apparent to me he meant that the “grasping for” such and such, framed as the “pure ego” (or as he termed in his earlier works “transcendental ego”), was not meant as an “idealism” but as the means of constantly revealing that that it is/isn’t - hence use of the term “ego pole.”

I think he did over stretch the concepts even here. Hiedegger and the whole post-modernist movement went even further as far as I can tell (but I’m assuming a lot and not about to pretend I’m not.)
AKA badgerjelly

User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3037
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Intelligence and Jung

Post by Burning ghost » November 12th, 2018, 2:35 am

Haicoway -
ktz wrote:
November 10th, 2018, 3:40 am
To answer the original question you posed, I think intelligence and understanding Jung are probably orthogonal concepts, not particularly correlated, but certainly there have been some highly intelligent people associated with Jung -- you can check out Brainpickings bit on Jung's friendship one of the most famous physicists of the twentieth century, Pauli of exclusion principle fame. https://www.brainpickings.org/2017/03/0 ... auli-jung/

Jung operates in a bit in the realm covered by Godel's incompleteness in that we simply don't have the analytic tools to verify his thinking one way or the other. Not everything needs to be able to be verified by the scientific method for it to be valid, but then you sort of pursue the ideas at your own risk as they lack the comfort and consistency of a scientific basis in viewing the phenomena.

I enjoy some of Jung's thinking but he may have been a bit off his rocker -- check out The Red Book if you haven't already. I more or less view his ideas about archetypes and the collective unconscious with a bit of interest, but in my own personal experience his most compelling work was on synchronicity and his conception of the acausal connecting principle. It helped me during a time of spiritual growth when I had to contend with some unexplainable phenomena that occured to me. Though I'd understand if that revelation proves me to be off my rocker as well, but you can read more about the idea at this link. [see forum policies on links]
I think this highlights some interesting points. The problem people find with Jung is their dislike of anything that is non-measureable. Psychology is always treated with deep suspicion and rightly so (imo.)

If we look at psychotherapy you’ll find that someone of a certain personality type will find better self-understanding by using a psychotherapist more aligned to their personality. When it comes to Jungian or Freudian attitudes what suits one person may not suit another. It is this individually catered therapy that makes the whole field quite unusual.

Speaking for myself I am extremely high in openness and tend towards breaking apart places where meaning is firmly established and attempting to construct meaning where no meaning appears likely. This has nothing to do with “intelligence” it is just something I do and exploring subjects in this manner has proven fruitful for me as well as frustrating.

The reason I sprang on H&N’s words about Husserl is becasue I see something very similar in Husserl’s words that I see in Jung’s. That is the focus on digging “below” the linguistic make-up we wear everyday in thought and action - it is necessary yet also distanced.

Whether people think Jung is ridiculous or not doesn’t matter. The depth and breadth and his scholarship are impossible to ignore and will remain an important chapter in future scholary works. I’d be lying if I said I thought everything he said was completely rational and without any hint of “woo woo.” Regardless there is more than enough of value in his work and there is literally no body of work out there I can fully agree with because to adhere to any singular view to me seems both dogmatic and wilfully ignorant (in the worst possible sense.) That said too, we all have to draw soem lines of distinction somewhere or we’d be unable to functionally navigate “through” the world.
AKA badgerjelly

User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3037
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Intelligence and Jung

Post by Burning ghost » November 12th, 2018, 3:46 am

Here is something for a little more depth into Husserl and the problem of assuming people don’t develop and explicate their ideas more thoroughly over time.

http://www.academia.edu/9305093/Husserl ... irical_Ego
AKA badgerjelly

Post Reply