psilojoe said:

Jung's theory of mythology fails for exactly the same reason that Campbell's theory fails (Campbell's theory is really just an updated version of Jung's older theory), because both Jung and Campbell were entirely unaware of the psychedelic altered state of consciousness, and therefore they were also unaware of the relation between the psychedelic state and mythological symbolism.

Both Jung and Campbell held that mythology symbolises elements of ordinary, mundane sober everyday experience (in the ordinary/sober state of consciousness), in this was they were both blind to the entheogenic altered-state symbolism contained in mythic storylines.

Jung never tripped in his lifetime, so he was never able to discover the deeper level of altered-state symbolism in mythology. So Jung's theory (just like Campbell's) is only indirectly legitimate. Jung recognised the essential similarity between all the different myths, but he did not recognise what the core mythic storyline (the transformative journey of the hero) really refers to (psychedelic mental transformation)

---

Amusing how you think that you can dismiss two intellectual giants based on YOUR evaluation of them, which no doubt seems superior in your eyes. I can only observe this inflation and come to my conclusions quietly on this end.

BTW, Jung struggled with a near-psychosis which happens to be an essential criteria for shamen the world over. He did not take mescaline (which was available to him), and  Marie-Louise von Franz (one of my 2nd analyst's control analysts), wrote that she did not believe that Jung would have taken mescaline. I agree with her completely. It was the reason why my interrogation by 12 analysts at once got me rejected from analytical training. Psychedelics are a Fourth Way path, and they do undercut the lengthy (and costly) course of analysis. I stood my ground or psychedelics against those "dirty dozen" during my interview in Memphis, TN in 1991.

zzripz said:

I love how when you search for etymology of myth you get the ancient Greek term 'mythos' and that it is 'of unknown origin'. Lol well of course it is, it is eternal. It goes right to the deepest well of our consciousness

HOWEVER, there is also Logos, and the control freaks who accentuate 'rationality' and 'order' have expropriated the more benign development and expression of mythos to impose a controlling matrix over 'reality. By demanding that their occult astrology and numbers and symbolism will magically control; us. That is what they are actually doing and many people are un-aware of this, and when you point it out they run to their psychology books and tell you you have a delusion

---

Myths are archetypal material, but if someone identifies WITH the archetype, they ARE delusional. This is what happens with all these Jesus Christ delusionals in mental hospitals. Sometimes, lesser identities have been assumed, like the delusional Napoleons who apparently arose in the early 19th century. A fascinating book is The Three Christs of Ypsilanti  http://www.amazon.com/Three-Christs-Ypsilanti-Narrative-Study/dp/B001EGUDRY/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1425493267&sr=1-2&keywords=three+christs+of+ypsilanti   There, three men with JC delusions were put together. Suddenly they're one-upping each other with 'Oh yeah, well I'm the Father too!,' and 'I'm the Holy Trinity!' Sorry, I shouldn't laugh at madmen.

Logos has numerous definitions, and yes while it certainly is translated as the root for logic and hence reason, it can also be attributed to the Neoplatonic Nous which is comprised of Plato's Pure Forms or Eternal Ideas. It remains for me a matter of speculation as to whether mythic themes are Eternal Ideas (in the Nous of God) or archetypal images that reveal the transcendental horizons of the human psyche. The third possibility is a synthesis, as Nous in the human psyche is in some old schools of theological thought, the contact point between the limited and the limitless, between man's spirit and The Spirit. This assumes monotheism or panentheism, not monism as the true metaphysic, where there is [comm]union but not identity.

Then, I am confronted with Buddhism which says that it is one of the three grave errors - Eternalism - which attributes eternality to ANY form, which would include a mythic theme. They would not have to exist in a Mind of God, but in a 'storehouse consciousness,' the Alayavijnana, but it's difficult for me to separate this notion from the Nous.

zzripz said:

maybe so, but what about the Nazi myth? That was/is a VERY dangerous myth, and so we must learn from THAT.
What about the scientism myth?

---

Silversoul said:

Carl Jung and Joseph Campbell in many ways ruined the study of mythology.  It's not that their analysis of myth is wrong; it's just myopic.  Certainly myths are symbolic - that much has always been known.  But Jungians tend to treat the symbols of mythology as conveying universal, transcendent truths, when more often than not, it is very context-specific.  Moreover, symbolism inherently comes with risk:  you can perform the ritual wrong, or mess up in your telling of the story or in conveying its message.  This is why anthropologists today do not take Jung or Campbell seriously, and instead draw their understanding from Peirce, Derrida, and Bakhtin.

---

Silversoul said:

Carl Jung and Joseph Campbell in many ways ruined the study of mythology.  It's not that their analysis of myth is wrong; it's just myopic.  Certainly myths are symbolic - that much has always been known.  But Jungians tend to treat the symbols of mythology as conveying universal, transcendent truths, when more often than not, it is very context-specific.  Moreover, symbolism inherently comes with risk:  you can perform the ritual wrong, or mess up in your telling of the story or in conveying its message.  This is why anthropologists today do not take Jung or Campbell seriously, and instead draw their understanding from Peirce, Derrida, and Bakhtin.

---

MarkostheGnostic said:

Didn't Wilber fall prey to whoever Bubba Free John called himself (oh yeah, Franklin Albert Jones became Da Free John, Da Love-Ananda, Da Kalki, Da Avadhoota and Da Avabhasa, among others. From 1991 until his death, he was known as Adi Da Love-Ananda Samraj or Adi Da, according to Wiki)? I think I saw a painting of that long-haired fat guy who was one of the first to declare himself a guru. Wilber, like other brilliant people seems to have gone mad himself on occasion. He IS an intellectual, a large Sheldonian Ectomorph or Meso-Ectomorphic Cerebrotonic, thus given to thought disorders.

Point well-taken about the class issues and mental illness vs. "spiritual emergency." I've been reading The Spiritual Gift of Madness by Farber and familiarizing myself with the 'Mad Pride' movement. There is that Awesome part of R.D. Laing's book The Divided Self (pp. 29-30) where Laing explained what the patient experiencing "catatonic excitement" was raving about in Kraepelin's lecture in 1905. Yes he was mad - mad as hell for being exploited in the inhumane way that he was.

---

Quote:

you'd have to lay out $100,000 in analytical fees before you were 'ready'

---

O M F G !!!

This reminds me of Stanislav Grof and 'his' 'Holotropic Breathing' trademarked therapy. I became interested in it in late 80s, and began reading his books, and was wanting to try HB. (I actually have tried it DIY and it is powerful) But IF you wanted to train to be an HB therapist it is extremely expensive and you have to travel to America--if your outside etc. Anfd if you want to take part in HB session that is also expensive too, and they are very picky. IF you have any history of 'mental illness' they run a mile. This shows up the utter hypocrisy of Grof, because he only pays lip service to exposing the mental illness myth. He is VERY limited hangout. Of course he advises people not to try HB alone---would be bad for business. He also is misogynistic seemingly blaming women and birth 'trauma' for all the world's problems

Christianity and ALL patriarchal religions and beliefs have a lot to asnwer for regarding them guilt-trippin' us about sexual pleasure and ecstasy. In ONE way that puritanical shit can actually AND to the 'evil' pleasure one may get from 'forbidden sex' but it also can lead to what happened to you, physiological pain, and of course others going into even more forbidden waters like sexual abuse of little children. And often when children get abused they go onto to do it to children when they are adult. it is like they are trying to act out what has been done to them psychologically

If you look into the varieties of porn online it is fascinating all the different types of sex. Quite mindblowing actually.

Many years ago, in a time where I had only several years provious had had a year of mindblowing LSD trips, I came into a hellish time which included me searching for some kind of integration, and coping with late adolescence, and one day decided to try Christianity. I loved Afro American gispel music, so my idea was to try and find a get-down church lol and get into the ecstatic singing n shit. I began reading the Bible. We had a big BIG Bible with pictures, and so I began reading. I must have been out of my mind Anyway I gets to the bit where it says that THE worst sin is thinking bad things about the 'holy ghost'--well what did I do? I started thinkging the very worst shit about it. next thing I am doubled up on the floor with belly ache because I am trying to stop myself thinking what I am and it is causing me actual physical pain!!!
Now, when I started this art course, becire I got to do BA--I jmet two middle aged women. They didn't know each other, but both gave me similar stories. They had both had cancer and in their own way blamed their Catholic upbringing for causing the disease!
This is why I call shitty myths that guilt you and divide and control you TOXIC. They really can be.

Read a great quote a while ago which said HOW brave people would have been in the past to 'sin' when they were 'sure' there was a devil and hell waiting for them when they died.