Why Jung? After Jung's death Karl Kerényi wrote: "If I now, looking back upon the phenomenon C.G. Jung, put into words what was most characteristic about him, also on the basis of personal contacts during the last twenty years, then it is taking the soul for real. For no psychologist of our time, the psyche possessed such a concreteness and importance as for him." (K., Wege und Weggenossen, vol. 2, München [Langen Müller] 1988, p. 346, Giegerich transl.)
You need to be a member of Depth Psychology Alliance to add comments!
Replies
Thanks for re-echoing the words that I had quoted with the Giegerich fragments, as this indeed hits the head on the nail of Jungian depth psychology: the reality of the psyche.
But your question now is "Why NOT Jung?" And unless you meant this as a mere rhetorical question, a non-committal tongue-in-cheak sort of expression, we should have to give a convincing answer and not shrink from the re-consideration of Jungian psychology. So why not Jung? In brief, here's my answer:
Because Jung's introverted and individualistic bias in psychology tends to make the political and social dimension of life "unconscious" and thus "neurotic" in itself, not fostering a genuine spirit of community and human "inter-viduation" rather than "individuation," of depth consciousness rather than unconsciousness, of inter-being rather than being MY "Self."