XPost: alt.psychology, alt.psychology.jung, alt.psychology.psychoanalysis   
   XPost: sci.psychology.theory, sci.psychology.misc   
   From: mlwi@swipnet.se   
      
   I am merely saying that those who project the demonic evil are the   
   very people who are possessed by it. Well worth to remember is that   
   the force of Thanatos exists in us all. The vital point is whether we   
   succeed in keeping our foot upon his neck.   
      
   Mats   
      
      
   "M Winther"  skrev i meddelandet   
   news:4ff5bdd0$0$4261$c83e3ef6@weathergirl-read.tele2.net...   
   > The phallus is a god that stands on one leg, and has one eye looking   
   > upwards. Wotan, who hung on the world ash, could set himself free   
   > from the motherly tree, by the sacrifice of one of his eyes. Carl   
   > Jung, at a tender age, dreamt of the phallus seated on a king's   
   > throne in an underground hall, although at this young age he   
   > couldn't identify it as such: "It was a huge thing reaching almost   
   > to the ceiling. But it was made of a curious composition: it was   
   > made of skin and naked flesh, and on top there was something like a   
   > rounded head with no face and no hair. On the very top of the head   
   > was a single eye, gazing motionlessly upward." His mother said "That   
   > is the man-eater." It was a subterranean god, not to be named   
   > (Memories, Dreams Reflections, pp.11f).   
   >   
   > This was the deity responsible for the two greatest carnages in   
   > world history, an epoch which Jung was destined to live through. We   
   > like to think of our civilization as ruled by an enlightened spirit,   
   > but the presence of the subterranean god can always be felt. Hatred,   
   > calumny, and contemptuous remarks, are part and parcel of our   
   > culture. It should be apparent to everyone that people aren't as   
   > good as they pretend. It is a falsehood characteristic of our   
   > civilization. Destructivity and malevolence does not depend on a   
   > misunderstanding, as always supposed. Most people, it seems, cannot   
   > withstand an opportunity to damage other people provided that they   
   > risk no harm themselves. Malevolence is used as a means of   
   > self-therapy. For this reason, it is exceedingly difficult to   
   > maintain civility in an Internet discussion forum.   
   >   
   > Why do people subscribe to ideologies, such as multiculturalism and   
   > cultural relativism? It has nothing to do with ethical motives. In   
   > fact, through ideological affiliation the adherents are able to   
   > castigate other people as devils. A multiculturalist notoriously   
   > accuses people of antidemocratic views, racism, right wing   
   > extremism, egoism, etc. This is the great allurement of collective   
   > ideologies, to be able to bully people. The only consequence is that   
   > one's social status is augmented. Such people cannot get along in   
   > life without recourse to calumniation. In another epoch, they would   
   > have appropriated the politically correct norms of that particular   
   > period in time. With great likelihood, they would have been firm   
   > Nazis. It enables them to partake in collective hatred, which is   
   > really the underlying motif, deriving from the god of Thanatos. They   
   > subscribe to the prevailing views on account of their political   
   > correctness, henceforth enabling them to demonize other people. It   
   > has nothing to do with the moral and intellectual content of the   
   > ideology, as such. The average multiculturalist of today, would have   
   > been a full-fledged Nazi in the thirties.   
   >   
   > They lack heartfelt convictions and merely parrot the standard   
   > tenets. The notion of political correctness means that people   
   > program themselves according to the most popular ideologies, whereas   
   > a proper understanding is lacking. Intellectual understanding is not   
   > possible anyway, since the ideology is only a chimera serving as   
   > concealment for the subterranean god. Their motivation to partake in   
   > the movement is to be able to make people suffer. Again,   
   > destructivity is functional. It does not derive from   
   > misunderstandings. In fact, Thanatos-driven people thrive on   
   > "misunderstandings". They have no wish to avoid them.   
   >   
   > There are only two alternatives; either you have faith or you have   
   > ideology. In the Old Testament we can observe how the once   
   > all-encompassing religious cosmogony, characteristic of ancient   
   > Egypt, splits into the opposites of Faith and Law. In the ensuing   
   > battle, faith came out victorious, in the form of Christianity.   
   > According to Pauline Christianity, the Law is revoked and faith has   
   > taken precedence. The same struggle is today ongoing in Islam, where   
   > 'sharia' (law) seems to prevail. Modern ideology in all its   
   > plenitude represents a throwback to the pharisaic mind-set. A modern   
   > ideological framework is an intellectual algorithm corresponding to   
   > the religious law of olden days. Horus and Christ are connected with   
   > the life-principle of faith, whereas Seth, and Old Testamental   
   > Jahve, focus on zeal and demand blood sacrifice. In Norse and   
   > Teutonic mythology, Wotan (Oden) is the lawgiver.   
   >   
   > Mats Winther   
   >   
   > "M Winther"  skrev i meddelandet   
   > news:4ff40418$0$4282$c83e3ef6@weathergirl-read.tele2.net...   
   >> If my conclusions resembles the truth about evil nature it would   
   >> imply that the Jungian theory of the shadow is incomplete. It   
   >> builds on the notion that destructivity in the social context   
   >> depends on shadow projection, and that the subject must integrate   
   >> the shadow, thus to remedy the problem. However, the theory does   
   >> not take into account the functional aspect of destructivity, which   
   >> serves to uphold a weak ego structure. Shadow projection and the   
   >> constant victimization of our peers is functional. Without recourse   
   >> to its shadow economy, the ego is threatened with collapse. This   
   >> function, equal to Freud's Thanatos, surfaces when subsistence is   
   >> no longer possible in the maternal environment, taken in its wide   
   >> sense. Unsophisticated consciousness cannot cope with the   
   >> complexity of the world without partially shutting it out and   
   >> defaming it, blaming it for personal failures. That's why we see   
   >> happy and naive primitives turn into machete murderers, and   
   >> harmonious children, still living in a condition of wholeness, turn   
   >> into bullies. This is the shadow phase of psychic development that   
   >> the majority of people on earth aren't capable of surpassing.   
   >>   
   >> There is in Jungian psychology the expectation that the shadow can   
   >> always be integrated, and that this accomplishment represents the   
   >> first step in individuation, defined as the path to true maturity   
   >> and wholeness. The truth in the matter is that only a portion of   
   >> earth's population can accomplish this, and only because they have   
   >> been endowed with a strong ego. Kathrin Asper in "The Abandoned   
   >> Child Within" (1993) has reached similar conclusions. She says that   
   >> the integration of the shadow is far from always the first phase in   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)