| |
|  |  |
 |
| Discussion: C.G.Jung Am interested in existentialism... any comments? >>By viking queen Seems a bit vague to elicit any comments. What are you interested in precisely about it? >>By Manucléiton viking...titles are never as interesting as the ideas which make them up. So existentialism will never mean anything without studying the content. I have never heard of Jung as an existentialist but then again, Im not expert in philosophy. I did read a bit ABOUT Jung in my brief study of early childhood development. One of the main ideas explored in reference to him was that of "archtypal" forms or universal symbols. What I struggle to see is a solid argument for a genetic or inherited imbedded symbol. On the surface it seems like a learned concept. However, one thing we might logically decide about things we learn is that we must first be equipt to learn it. In other words, we cannot make use of symbols without having the brain capacity to understand them. Dogs do not posses the brain structure nor the brain function to do complex math and so we should never expect them to. So it begs the question, of what use is symbols to us? To what end and for what survival purpose might this type of brain power benefit a human being? I would guess that Jung has some thoughtful answers or at the minimum, insights, into this problem. >>By Hume Ungus You are not logged in. To access all functionality, you can log in via Flork. Flork is a worldwide community of people who are interested in music, movies and books. As a Flork-User, you can participate in this and other discussions, meet new people and exchange messages with other members directly: www.flork.com |