Hi All
I Self-Published this text on Kindle Amazon: Complex and Image Psychology: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Complex-Image-Psychology-Paul-Budding-ebook/dp/B00JUVDQ2E/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1398182134&sr=1-1&keywords=paul+budding
Note that it has a word-count of just over 6,000.
It will appeal to those of you who are interested in Jung's early Complex psychology work and will appeal to those of you who don't mind mixing Jung with Janet and (dare I say it) Freud.
Best Wishes,
Paul Budding.
Replies
Anyway, that wasn't the real reason why I'm writing to you. I'm doing something similar to you (do-it-yourself) mentioned in my comments in this discussion topic: http://www.depthpsychologyalliance.com/forum/topics/a-multi-causal-... Some editors from Korea have asked me to submit by the end of June a chapter for a book on technology, consciousness, ethics, and future (all the while politicians are doing their stuff). It's not like my career depends on it, but it would be amazing if about 30 pages written by me (improved from what I've mentioned in that discussion) got published. Actually, it's a much longer story. It always is.
It kind of makes sense that, since brains are so complex, that there are people out there thinking that artificial consciousness is just around the corner. On the other hand, if one for instance pays attention to the diagrams and explanations mentioned here http://www.people.vcu.edu/~mikuleck/PPRISS3.html (2.2.3 The (M, R) system), it looks like there is something "wrong" with what we were thought in schools about causality, life, and perhaps even time (it is better if one sees for him/herself whether causal or temporal loops make sense or not). Evan Thompson in Mind in Life, Terrence Deacon in Incomplete Nature, and Alicia Juarrero in Dynamics in Action (a free article and a book with the same title available online) use very similar ideas and terminology. Deacon was even accused for plagiarism of Juarrero's book, but all three authors are original in their approach. Juarrero for instance mentions hermeneutic interpretation of changes in attitude (what you call complex and image). The long story shorter, only Thompson mentions that there might (but he doesn't insist that it actually is the case) be something strange in our understanding of physics, causality, and time. All three authors mention Aristotle's four causes.
Anyway, we create our own parts and machines don't. Machines operate on signal and our brains on noise. We can (try to) understand the liar's paradox and machines can't.
See zen Buddhism and koans for some sarcasm, weirdness, and paradoxes if you haven't already.
Hello,
What is your opinion about what is happening in Ukraine right now? Please, don't treat me like some bore or pain in the bottom. I would really like to figure out why that situation takes place again, again, and again, and meanwhile people are more worried about their chakras and trying to be wise and spiritual 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Who will react when a drone comes to some of us?
My view is that the West has many ememies in the world who would like to bomb us. But that Russia is definitely not one of them. They are fairly well integrated into modern global culture.