Journal of Jungian Scholarly Studies
Editor: Darrell Dobson, Ph.D.
Volume 8, 2012
Inez Martinez, Ph.D.
Copy Editor: Matthew Fike, Ph.D.
Table of Contents and Abstracts
Peer-Reviewed Academic Articles
Generational Attention: Remembering How to Be a People
Peter T. Dunlap
In the aftermath of World War I C. G. Jung responded to the destruction wrought by humankind by imagining humanity as a single, semi-conscious being. Jung imagines a naturalistic God capable of helping us remember how to be a people by using an awareness of all of human history to guide the species’ decision-making. As a psychologist I use Jung’s image to cultivate this “generational attention” in progressive political groups, particularly helping them cultivate the “public emotional intelligence” necessary to bind themselves to one another as a human community. Today the Jungian community can contribute to the articulation of a uniquely Jungian political psychology by following this image and by integrating a more differentiated feeling function in our organizations as we go.
Jung, History and His Approach to the Psyche
Kevin Lu, Ph.D.
The continued existence of analytical psychology in the academy has largely depended on applications of analytical psychology to other disciplines. These attempts at “applied psychoanalysis” are in danger, however, of becoming examples of “wild psychoanalysis.” To remedy this, applications need to work at the interface of the two disciplines in question, building a firm foundation as the basis of dialogue. In this paper, I address the application of analytical psychology to the discipline of history by first exploring the ways in which ‘history’ and the historical method influenced, and found expression in, Jung’s psychology. Given the extent to which Jung evoked ‘history’ and depended on it as a hermeneutical framework, Petteri Pietikainen’s argument – that a revision of archetypal theory needs to occur if analytical psychology is to conduct meaningful analyses of culture – requires deeper consideration.
Re-reading Sophocles’s Oedipus Plays: Reconceiving Vengeance as Cultural Complex
Inez Martinez, Ph.D.
Sophocles’s Oedipus plays depict failed integration of self-knowledge as worthy of divinization. Acting out vengeance is the evidence of Oedipus’s failed integration. Oedipus’s task of integration pivots on grasping in what sense he can be understood as guilty. His plight demonstrates that ignorance is part of unconsciousness and, contrary to Jung’s attitude toward ignorance, requires some kind of coping with responsibility. Vengeance was a conscious value among the ancient Greeks. In Sophocles’s last play, Oedipus at Colonus, Oedipus acts out vengeance against his sons, and Sophocles divinizes this acting out through having Oedipus join the goddesses, the Furies. This divinization suggests that vengeance is archetypal, depending on culture only for images of manifestation. I argue that Oedipus’s acting out of vengeance can be read as symptomatic of a cultural complex. I identify the situation leading to his acting out as his failure to imagine how creatively to take responsibility for his parricide and incest. Reading Oedipus’s acting out as failure to integrate his self-knowledge opens up the question of what successful integration could have entailed. I turn to work by Edward C. Whitmont to suggest what acceptance of responsibility for deeds not intended might look like. Finally, I turn to work by Gottfried M. Heuer to address the issues of power and love raised by Oedipus’s dilemma. In order to read these plays in terms of Jung’s concepts of visionary literature and of integration, I critique and discard two literary critical concepts used in previous criticism of Sophocles’s plays: 1) that the intention of the author determines meaning in a text; and 2) that no framework beyond those given in a play may be used to interpret meaning.