WHAT: Special Study Group: Jung's with Jungian Analyst Robert
WHEN: Starts January 19th: Consists of 20 pre-recorded lectures of 1.5 hours each; an 88-page study guide created by, Robert 's colleague, Jill Fischer; and this written online discussion forum. Runs 40 weeks
WHO: Anyone who is interested in Jung's , Robert . Facilitators: Janet Fortess and Chris Doggett
>>>This Special Study Group starts January 19th, 2013. It is an open written discussion forum based on following the pre-recorded 40-hour audio course* with Robert available from Jung Platform.
This is a central place to which you can come and post questions or comments about the designated module you listened to for the 2-week period and interact with others who are doing the same thing. As such, there is no set "time" it occurs, but rather is ongoing and you can post or respond at your convenience. Janet Fortess and Chris Doggett, students and colleagues of Robert will be providing some structure and be on hand to facilitate the discussion, and Robert himself will also be checking in.
*If you're not following the audio course, you're still welcome to engage here in whatever discussion is emerging--though of course you'll likely get far more out of the process if you are able to listen to the course itself.
THREE WAYS TO PARTICIPATE
1. Listen to an interview with Robert on Shrink Rap Radio with host Dr. David Van Nuys to help you get to know Robert better in preparation for the course.
2. Get your copy of this in- audio course from Jung Platform. The course consists of 20 lectures of approximately 1.5 hours each which occur every two weeks. In each lecture Robert addresses a few pages from the . You can read along in your copy of the . This course comes with an 88-page study guide designed by Robert 's colleague, Jill Fischer, which contains a synopsis of each lecture. After each session, there are questions to help you test your understanding. After finishing the entire 40-week course and tests, you get a CE certificate and a Certificate of Completion from the Jung Platform University.
(Cost FULL COURSE: Lectures 1 through 20 + 30 CEs + Synopsis / Study Guide - $99). members get additional 25% off using the code" "). The course may also be purchased in two individual parts.
3/ Join the online discussion forum in the Psychology online community (HERE!) starting January 19, 2013, where everyone who follows the audio course from Jung Platform can come together and discuss each particular section. This forum will be facilitated by two professionals, Janet Fortess and Chris Doggett, who have been trained in Embodied Imagination with Robert for three years and Robert will be checking in every two weeks as well. (This forum is open to everyone, regardless of whether you follow the audio course or have the )
Robert , PsyA, is a Jungian psychoanalyst who graduated from the C.G. Jung Institute in Zurich in 1977. Since then he was been in private practice in the United States and Australia. Robert founded the Santa Barbara Healing Sanctuary and developed a method of working with dreams called Embodied Imagination. He has also written several s, including the worldwide bestseller ‘A Little Course In Dreams’.
I am Jenny from Sydney in Australia. I have had an interest in Jungian psychology through wanting to understand the individuation process.
I would also like to understand how to comprehend my dreams in a better way.
Is there any one else here from Australia?
I have yet to see the movie, but I read the book by the same name. The many details of Jung's life, documented via his letters to various people, paint a picture of a man, very much with 'feet of clay'. A man of his times, which included a patriacal attitude, at least when it came to his affairs. The book had a sobering effect, reminding me of the dangers of the unexamined admiration I was engaged in.
Hi Forum Members,
Please note that Lecture 2 begins a new thread/subsection for discussion during the next two weeks.
Find it by going to Groups and then Community Education-Red Book Study Group with Robert Bosnak.
No need to break the thread of conversation, just shift to posting your replies in the Lecture 2 thread.
It will get unwieldy if we just continue page after page of replies.
All previous 2 week discussions will be archived at the Community Education location.
Hoping to keep the communication channels easy and flowing.
Your comment on Mary Magdalene loving her lord most reminds me of the fable of Solomon. Two women are fighting over their right to a child; one accuses the other of stealing it in the night; the other insists it is hers. There is no way to absolve/resolve it easily. Solomon calls for a sword, suggesting that dividing the child will solve the matter perfectly. The child, obviously, will die if this solution is enacted.
One woman says, Give the child to the other. The other woman says, The sword is a good idea; divide the child; this is fair. Solomon awards the child to the woman who gives it up. Her love and sacrifice to keep the child alive makes her the real mother.
In some cases, the true mother-lover of something will give it up rather than destroy it.
Emma perhaps was willing to give up her beloved construct of marriage -- Give her the child, rather than dividing and destroying it -- in order to experience the fullness of C.G. Jung and ultimately her own development as he went through his travails and creations of constructing the new calling-in-the-depths psychology.
Rather than Mother-Whore, perhaps the secret lies in analysis of the Grail legend. To what extent is one willing to sacrifice -- to follow one's bliss --- even if it goes against all logical order, of following the manifestation of the enantiodromia leading to individuation in its strange conclusions?
I acknowledge Mercurius, the mercurial......idea of getting you to the right place for the wrong reasons.
Thank you so much for your reply. I am particularly enriched by the phrase "polarity thinker" which turns upside down the usual notions of thinking as "either/or". Again thank you for the quote from Hillman. Is it the case that male and female do not represent oppositional poles but faces of something similar? jWhat does that view hold for the future? Androgyny? Hermaphrodites? Is this regression or integration?
"20,000 hues of multiplicity" is an elegant phrase...how do we translate this, an idea I believe in also, to personal life, the material world which appears to hold so much by way of oppositions. Holding the tension of the opposite, no judgements indicates each person working toward their own individuation.
How I am thinking here feels to me very superficial, like I'm missing something essential...
As a survivor of extreme abuse, incest, rape and torture at the hands of men, who has gone on to achieve a double Master's degree and more importantly raise a son into a loving, wonderful father, husband and son, I know the question of men and women reveals so much more for us than might be apparent on the surface. I hold the tension of living with my male partner, and the past...surely we hold our collective past in a tension of trying to live today in much the same way.
The notion of 20,000 hues comes from the same Hillman article. It actually is the scientific study of the human ability to distinguish color into 20,000 shades. The way to work outside polarity is to stick closely to each phenomenon and see it as particular, not in contradistinction. It is the eye of the painter. Leaders are dangerous people. The greatest of all guides, Mercury, leads by delusion, getting you to the right place for the wrong reasons. Don't trust me. Just develop your responses and find your way through the lands of yore. Warm greetings. Robbie
I must clarify my understanding of absurd. It is important to me to keep both the rational and the non-rational approach going at the same time. From the point of view of the surface this has absurd aspects: a man giving advice to the dead, speaking to a man in red, taking fairy tales as literal worlds. For the rational mind this is gibberish, which of course comes from the great works of the alchemist Geber. I want to keep profound meaning and utter meaninglessness simultaneously in mind; Jung and Camus. But that is because I as a post holocaust European Jew cannot exclude utter meaninglessness. So when I speak in this series I have both in mind: the profoundly meaningful of this journey inspires me, as you can hear in my voice, while the gibberish of it gives me a painful groan. I stay in the paradox of divine madness. It is also mad to drop down into the world of characters and insist it is real. To me it is both awesome and get-a-grip.
It would be a major undertaking to develop the topic of ethics in a Jungian context but it seems that personal development is the prime directive still in adults analogous to the development of children in which case judgment should be set aside as we support them in the process of finding their way to living out of their authentic selves.
The gull perhaps symbolized the free life affirming anima energy that had insufficient space in his life due to the masculine effort to master death and so perhaps his relationship with Toni was intended to compensate for this one-sidedness.
Was it perhaps narcissistic of him to value his welfare over Emma's rather than identifying with her to a degree that invested him ethically in acting in her interest? Yes I think so but I think we cannot pass judgment on his developmental path and what he felt necessary to support his spirit.
Calling up the "daimons of the boundless"...
There is the murder of Siegfried, which is where I left off in this week's audio lecture. From our group discussion... There are triads within Jungs' marriage. There is the development of the individual within individuation vs. the ethics of polite society and established culture.
What happens when a brilliant third party enters into an exceptional marriage with exceptional people? How much influence did C.G. Jung's actions have on both Wolff and E. Jung? How much did E. Jung's decision to remain with C.G. Jung and Wolff in a formally accepted triad have on Emma's powerful work with the Grail? With her own analytical development? With C.G. Jung's? With Wolffe?
The threads of interconnection are unmistakable. Both Wolf and Jung became analysts. Von Franz worked with Emma and then completed Emma's scholarship on the Grail. Von Franz although not lover is another key female. There are others as conceptualized in A Dangerous Method and historical documents; there is the mythology of Carl Jung; there are the gripping animas and animuses represented by these powerful female and male characters; there is the everyday actuality of what it is like to sojurn in the region of the depths of the soul vs. the arrogant, know-it-all spirit of the times.
For us here...there is the past to relook, and, as importantly, there is the new future toward which we are all being directed, hurtled toward, from TRB study group. Where is the spirit of the depths directing us? Toward what actions, both acceptable and unacceptable? Are we also not saints, the strange and revulsive actions which Robert describes in his opening moments of audio 2?