Michael Britt wrote: > In the latest episode of my podcast I discuss our tendency to put more > meaning into coincidence than really is there. I discussed a little > probability and a little critical thinking. I then interviewed a Jungian > analyst who explained what Jung meant by the term "Synchronicity". > > In all honesty, I don't think he came off looking too good and I'm > wondering if I did him a disservice by not pointing out to the listeners > that our (Western) way of thinking is based on empiricism and that this > mode of thought is different than the tradition Jung came from.
Jung came from the Western mode of thought. Switzerland is in the "West," no? Indeed, he did psychological experiments early in his career (reported at the famous 1909 meeting at Clark University, and available online at: http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Jung/Association/ ). He later generated (his own interpretations) of some Eastern modes of thought to his discourse, but it would not be right to say that Jung "came from" those traditions. He was among that group of early- and mid-20th century writers who attempted, with varying degrees of success, to bring (what they took to be) eastern thought to the western public (Crowley, Blavatsky, Merton, Watts, etc.) > I have to > admit though that the philosophical underpinnings of Jung's thinking is > not my forte. We all want students to be critical thinkers, but I also > want them to appreciate different modes of thinking. > Knowing and understanding need not be the same as believing and adhering. I agree that (if you are gong to include Jung in your syllabus) that you own it to them to present him in the best possible light (and then later to present his critics in the best possible light). Otherwise, he just becomes a foil for your own beliefs. Best, Chris -- Christopher D. Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 Canada 416-736-2100 ex. 66164 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.yorku.ca/christo/ ========================== --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
