ok, cartographer@ok_cartographer

Replying to @localcaudillo

I do not doubt that at all. Philemon (Jung’s soul) told him to start a new religion. Jung consciously and constantly rejected this, insisting on his work being entirely empirical and scientific. I propose he was unconscious of his shadow: the mystic hermeticist. Analysis is, in many ways, an initiation. The analyst guides you through the process of “individuation” - the core tenant of Jungian psychology. Many cease searching for an external God and sequentially seek the “Self”. Most “Jungians” practice the neo-pagan, secular humanist religion known as “Jungianism”. We can hardly blame Jung. His most famous axiom is “Thank God I am Jung and not a Jungian”. Regardless, his followers stopped calling his psychology by the name he gave it, which was Analytical Psychology, but rather call it Jungian Psychology (making sure to remember the prophet). Does this mean his work isn’t valuable? Of course not. Projection is very real, as are introverts and extroverts (concepts he invented). However, his sin was remaining steadfast in his notion of empiricism when we should have went full mystic. This would have allowed him to see what was psychology and what was spirit. Much of what he did was spirit and much was psychology, but it’s hard to tell since he muddied the waters. He lacked, I sense, the “discernment of spirits”, partly due to his phenomenological approach which insisted on being an unobjective observer. This is impossible, as the Spirit requires participation. Nevertheless, many get duped in the cult that was formed around Jung. But we must learn from him, as he has a wealth of wisdom and is, for all intents and purposes, the most significant spiritual figure we’ve had in quite a while.