This is a quote from Dr. Carl Jung. It is from a section where he is talking about symbols and their relation to dreams. The source is in the video, did you spot it?
Im starting to be very skeptical of Jesus Christ. And what I mean is, I can feel like the son of God and stand for righteous things. And die for my followers to believe in my righteousness. So why did we save the Jews from the holocaust if the Jews killed Christ?
Divine revelation comes through geometry which creates a Symmetry which creates a vision for the eye to see and behold, The cat is out of the bag, Hurry take the plank position which is a position of repentance from which one rises again
Interesting point of view! Those icons are neither inventions nor divine in origin. I think that the source you are giving sounds a lot like divine to me.
@humannature698 yes I did. That is why I pointed our it's not Carl Jung speaking. Eventhough it's made to sound like him. I haven't personally sited or studied that particular quote to see if it is indeed a true reference. But that isn't my offering here. It's simply to confirm that it usnt Carl Jung speaking. Thank you though for your comment I appreciate it. 🙏
If they are involuntary spontaneous manifestations how can you refute their source being divine? A divine power? Does not all creation come from the unconscious or fantasy, nature, god whatever you want to call it?
You cant refute devine because metaphysics is not science and not falsifiable, i do know that jung believed our collective unconscious held information that individuals in a society didnt. Like how he claims to have been expecting the rise of the nazi party based on the dreams of his patients. Jungs beliefs center more on the way in which symbols encode the knowledge of our ancestors and make our conscious aware of things we have not put together consciously. For it to prove a divine source we would need a verifiable and not easily refuted case of real prophecy or mind reading etc. jung is giving a scientific explanation for religious thinking here that actually leads us away from metaphysics and towards an evolutionary psychology view of the human condition.
If you’re interested in the answer for how not: the field of theory you are referring to is “Archetypology”, and looks at how structure and pattern emerge from “nothingness”. In terms of their source not being divine, the question just becomes: “How does a person define the word ‘divine’”? are the involuntary spontaneous manifestation’s sources magical and transcendental? Probably not. But are they ‘divine’ in the sense of being sublime and accidentally elegant? Absolutely.
@@fishstickbye4060I like this thinking because it allows for the mystery while’s still acknowledging that it could all be an accident. It might all be an elegant accident. It’s a whole paradigm shift in perspective that any believer and non-believer would benefit from understanding without necessarily having to throw out every ounce of their own subjective world view to understand., if it is an accident, that accident is so elegant it feels divine enough that one can see reason in why someone else might choose to believe that something chose for this reality to be this way despite its side of awfulness, even if it chose this reality for some reason we don’t understand, and it becomes a virtue when someone lives by the faith (hope in) that whoever that chooser is, they are good in some way. But reality is organized in a way where it’s just as conceivable that everything just is what it is by pure chance alone. It’s a strong intellectual middle ground
Jung was a deluded mystic who believed everything could be interpreted as a sign of divinity. No hard substantial evidence to back this up. The imagination of man knows no bounds in attempts to create an alternative reality to rest his hope upon.
Yes and no, this short is a direct quote from Jung where he denies what you are accusing him of (e.g. to interpret everything as a sign from the divine) some people even believe that Jung was agnostic, that being said you are right. Jung had weird beliefs that modern science cannot support, but he claims that science is flawed and too much restrictive. Personally, I find that his ideas are interesting enough to share but lack the minimum of evidence to believe in.
Imagination has a reality of its own. What do you think you see when you wake up your house your car the streets and buildings it was first in the imagination of man. You want to do a double blind placebo study on the imagination of man? Good luck Jung was the Sherlock Holmes of the mind you don't figure out an individuals mind the mind by looking at averages for sociological purposes fine but not an individual psyche. The imagination is where the limitless possibilities exist, your idea of reality is where you see the limits.
Existence itself is unknown, magical and divine and evidence at the same time. Its funny scientist used to describe the existence through various laws of physics but never questions how these laws are formed? How everything from a cell to solar system to galaxy is functioning in a synchronized manner.
So studies pertaining to the mind and soul have no merit in conversation as factual evidence because you say so? Testing means nothing? The very essence of science and theory is thrown out for the mind?
This is a quote from Dr. Carl Jung. It is from a section where he is talking about symbols and their relation to dreams. The source is in the video, did you spot it?
Blessings brother
Well done using your own voice instead of AI. Peace and love brothers and sisters.
hello ! does this account have an instagram please? thank you !! i was very pleased to see a Jung fan that hates Freud just like me
Im starting to be very skeptical of Jesus Christ. And what I mean is, I can feel like the son of God and stand for righteous things. And die for my followers to believe in my righteousness. So why did we save the Jews from the holocaust if the Jews killed Christ?
Divine revelation comes through geometry which creates a Symmetry which creates a vision for the eye to see and behold, The cat is out of the bag, Hurry take the plank position which is a position of repentance from which one rises again
This is the greatest of all Science. Once known as the king of Science.
Creating believers creates conflict, outer and inner.
Interesting point of view! Those icons are neither inventions nor divine in origin. I think that the source you are giving sounds a lot like divine to me.
Not Carl Jung speaking. Just saying.
It's a direct quotation from his book, even the source is in the video
@humannature698 yes I did. That is why I pointed our it's not Carl Jung speaking. Eventhough it's made to sound like him. I haven't personally sited or studied that particular quote to see if it is indeed a true reference. But that isn't my offering here.
It's simply to confirm that it usnt Carl Jung speaking.
Thank you though for your comment I appreciate it. 🙏
@@emeraldfernandez5010 Yea ofc it's me reading the quote.
The religious believer likes alot of what Carl Yung said before he died.
I’d rather math it out. But thx
Wtf does this even mean
If they are involuntary spontaneous manifestations how can you refute their source being divine? A divine power? Does not all creation come from the unconscious or fantasy, nature, god whatever you want to call it?
You cant refute devine because metaphysics is not science and not falsifiable, i do know that jung believed our collective unconscious held information that individuals in a society didnt. Like how he claims to have been expecting the rise of the nazi party based on the dreams of his patients. Jungs beliefs center more on the way in which symbols encode the knowledge of our ancestors and make our conscious aware of things we have not put together consciously. For it to prove a divine source we would need a verifiable and not easily refuted case of real prophecy or mind reading etc. jung is giving a scientific explanation for religious thinking here that actually leads us away from metaphysics and towards an evolutionary psychology view of the human condition.
On the dot
That's why despite being involuntary inventions, they are fascinating
If you’re interested in the answer for how not: the field of theory you are referring to is “Archetypology”, and looks at how structure and pattern emerge from “nothingness”.
In terms of their source not being divine, the question just becomes: “How does a person define the word ‘divine’”? are the involuntary spontaneous manifestation’s sources magical and transcendental? Probably not. But are they ‘divine’ in the sense of being sublime and accidentally elegant? Absolutely.
@@fishstickbye4060I like this thinking because it allows for the mystery while’s still acknowledging that it could all be an accident. It might all be an elegant accident. It’s a whole paradigm shift in perspective that any believer and non-believer would benefit from understanding without necessarily having to throw out every ounce of their own subjective world view to understand., if it is an accident, that accident is so elegant it feels divine enough that one can see reason in why someone else might choose to believe that something chose for this reality to be this way despite its side of awfulness, even if it chose this reality for some reason we don’t understand, and it becomes a virtue when someone lives by the faith (hope in) that whoever that chooser is, they are good in some way. But reality is organized in a way where it’s just as conceivable that everything just is what it is by pure chance alone. It’s a strong intellectual middle ground
Except this isnt the case with Christ. Christ is a historical figure who rose from the dead
Symbolically
@@drew67gmdrm72 no
There’s no proof he even existed
Divine origin & answer is Jesus! Without knowing Him humans will be kept in the darkness of the devil.
Now this is a pantheist narrator from India.
Lol why u talkin in accent
It's my normal accent lol.
FATHER ONLY U ALONE KNOW HOW HUNGARY WE ARE FOR U!!!!!!! PLEASE Help however U WILL
You are hungry for something you already have. You are part of god but you are blinded by knowledge and seeking.
I'm gonna start propagating Magyarland. 🙂
@@ABeautifulEarthForOurChildrenYou are a creature of God. A contingent being.
Jung was a deluded mystic who believed everything could be interpreted as a sign of divinity. No hard substantial evidence to back this up. The imagination of man knows no bounds in attempts to create an alternative reality to rest his hope upon.
Yes and no, this short is a direct quote from Jung where he denies what you are accusing him of (e.g. to interpret everything as a sign from the divine) some people even believe that Jung was agnostic, that being said you are right. Jung had weird beliefs that modern science cannot support, but he claims that science is flawed and too much restrictive. Personally, I find that his ideas are interesting enough to share but lack the minimum of evidence to believe in.
Imagination has a reality of its own. What do you think you see when you wake up your house your car the streets and buildings it was first in the imagination of man. You want to do a double blind placebo study on the imagination of man? Good luck Jung was the Sherlock Holmes of the mind you don't figure out an individuals mind the mind by looking at averages for sociological purposes fine but not an individual psyche. The imagination is where the limitless possibilities exist, your idea of reality is where you see the limits.
Existence itself is unknown, magical and divine and evidence at the same time. Its funny scientist used to describe the existence through various laws of physics but never questions how these laws are formed? How everything from a cell to solar system to galaxy is functioning in a synchronized manner.
Say me one thing, one damn thing, that "science", with its "substantial evidence", explains with 100% conviction, before calling Jung 'deluded'.
@@User24586fyaqyerwhkibngkiotrse Jung's delusion yields more merit than most's reality.
always amusing how psychiatrist, the lowest form of both science and medicine, use “in fact” when stating an opinion.
You forgot to state that this is your opinion, and in no way supported by fact.
So studies pertaining to the mind and soul have no merit in conversation as factual evidence because you say so? Testing means nothing? The very essence of science and theory is thrown out for the mind?
Have a YAHsome day Dirk🌹