วีดีโอ

2:07

Harris Michael Hernandez Kevin White Laura

I also want to speak to what I think Jung actually meant by "your truth"... Jung obviously was not a post-modern relativist, that much I think it entirely evident. So then how can we explain his meaning? When Jung says "your truth", as I understand him, what he actually meant is something like "your values and convictions", because obviously it is our subjective values and convictions which ultimately influence our behavior and therefor defines who we ultimately are in terms of how we live our lives and relate to others. And though truth is necessarily objective, our perception of truth is largely subjective based on the limits of our awareness, perception and degree of personal experience. And so our values and convictions will be defined by those limits. That is a large part of what it means when we say "to your own self be true", that and being honest with yourself as much as possible. Remember that Jung was as much a poet as he was anything else. Also I think it should be noted that so much of Jung's is language is often poetic, and he employs a sort of poetic license which sometimes makes his meaning difficult to make sense of, especially in "Libre Novus", which he never actually intended to publish for mass consumption. So you obviously cant just cherry pick Jung if you want to understand him. You have to take everything he said and wrote within the context of everything else he has said or wrote.

Concerning the nature of the unconscious, and by extension the nature of consciousness itself, it seems to me that the conscious/unconscious distinction is indicative of an interplay between more or less opposing fields of existential experience or states of "being", perhaps defined by the degree to which one is actually aware of their own experience. And when I say opposing, I don't mean to say that they are antagonistic so much as compensating and sympathetic / interdependent. Perhaps in a way they are or otherwise can be antagonistic, at least in terms of how these states or fields interact within the psyche of someone with a relatively disintegrated personality, because there is obviously conflict involved in the process of individuation and becoming conscious or more conscious, and vice versa in the process of reverting to more primitive unconscious states. But seen as relative and differentiated aspects of a contiguous totality, within the context of the recognition that psyche is a self regulating system, these differentiated states or fields must be understood as being more or less fundamentally sympathetic... That being said, the unconscious obviously doesn't need to be physical to be real, though perhaps there is some as of yet undiscovered physical quality which is associated with the unconscious/conscious fields of "being", perhaps some interdimensional quasi physical reality which we do not yet recognize or understand to literally exist in a materialistic sense. But that is still something of a metaphysical speculation which obviously cannot be proven one way or the other at this time, and doesn't really matter insofar as our understanding that consciousness/unconsciousness are in fact real at least insomuch as psyche is real, even if such things cannot be physically weighed or measured.

Great dialogue and resource. Thank you!

6:00 " we are the lucky ones. " 23:46-25:28 27:18 35:19 -till the end 43:00 44:02 50:52 54:12 real/meaningful psychotherapy 55:35

Grazie, intervista molto interessante !

Dmitry shared such meaningful understandings, I'm grateful for what he said, not too many people will not understand on this level.

Beebe's idea do not mean anything to me. He's a nebulous and vague speaker, lacking credibility or clarity. His take on his anima related to Franklin Roosevelt and Obama is so absurd as to have no meaning except corruption and betrayal. Homosexuals are typically and stereotypically Leftist.

Grazie Stefano complimenti

Thank you. I was trying to work through Jung who tried to link Freud and Adler, the idea of totaliarism in Reichs approach and ideas by Balint who also recaptured Freudian ideas but re-worked them in his work. Marcuse vs Fromm, Marcuse and Popper. How Norbert Elias tried to link Psychoanalysis and sociology. The phenomenon of nudging, the concept of the rational in law and so forth. Dealing with differing notions, and the grade of convinced ideas (fatalism) while still keep up stability emotionally which can be then misinterpreted as hypervigilance, or cathatonic schizophrenia from mere Observation and too quickly (mis)interpretation which raises the question whether - sociologically- who is in the Position to judge others. I guess it is true that people knowing about these things, respecting others individuality and ,spleens' exist, beyond narrow phantasies or dreams.

He is so incredibly eloquent and so wonderfully fluent in his typological theory. What a privilege to listen to!

*promosm* 😄

Brilliant thank you.

This was very interesting to me, for multiple reasons. Until this conversation I had not known of Ferenczi. In my mid 20's I became an analysand for a psychiatrist training to become a psychoanalyst. These sessions lasted five days/week for 8 or 9 years. I finally terminated because the sessions had been stagnant the last years. This doctor seemed to be a strict Freudian, who was extremely rigid, never interpreting my zillions of dreams, and rarely offering any words of interpretation - old school I presume. I never "liked" the man from the very first session - and I'm not sure he liked me, either. I've just recently analyzed this relationship because I realize how primary the transference is, and I continue to self-analyze and always will. As I gather more understanding of myself, the clouds of confusion regarding all those years is beginning to dissolve.Apparently, most analysands develop obvious transference feelings (love, hatred, etc) for the analyst. I did not - it's as if we were both caught in a Catch22 scenario. I was his female patient whose case must be satisfactorily resolved. I did not have the funds to find another analyst. It was bizarre! No doubt he thought that I was a Narcissist. 😩 Yet, I realized young 2.5 years that I had empathy. My mother did not, nor was she gentle! Were these feelings ever discussed in my first analysis? NEVER. This is why Ferenczi piqued my interest. 💕 Apologies for turning this conversation into "all about me." It's just that Ferenczi leaps from the computer speakers (and grave) 🤣👧🏼 wanting me to speak out (kidding). LOL Decades later, I got caught up in a breakup from my 12 year relationship from my Significant Other lover. I realized that I was living a lie and my only way out was to confront myself, therefore, I needed another psychoanalysis. Yet, again, I did not have the funds, nor the time - even IF a psychoanalyst were available in my semi-rural town. Logic told me that I must dust off my original analysis and make improvements so that I could resolve the crisis. It took years! I became a much kinder, wiser, and more intuitive psychoanalyst than the original one ever was. In essence, I retooled psychoanalysis for myself believing that empathy and tenderness was what my childhood did not give me. I discovered that my mother did not welcome me with loving, open arms because I was not the presumed boy baby that her doctor told her I would be. Not only that, but her breast milk dried up about two weeks later 😭 Can anyone imagine how I felt 😒 And, having two old parents, neither of them had time or interest to play childlike games with me, the much younger and last child of their generational authoritarian Christian union. While in grade school I promised myself that when I had children, I would find time to play silly games with them and I would never send them to public schools...boring. I am not brilliant, just curious and above average IQ. I'm confident Mr. Original Analyst who got through medical school was way smarter than I. Yet, something was clearly off with him, and perhaps Freud, too, since he modeled himself after Dr. Freud. Ferenczi was onto something 😳 I must research him, now that I'm finally finished psychoanalyzing myself. Dr. Dimitrijevic is Fabulous - I've listened to all of his lectures available to me and share many of his views. 🤩 encyclopedias anyone

I really wanted to listen to this. The sound was too bad unfortunately. :(

I cannot hear a single word of what they are saying.

“Encounters with the self are typically felt as defeats to the ego.” 15:23

To understand the placebo effect and how it can manifest in both positive and negative outcomes simply by believing something unreal, is real. I think I could correctly argue that this understanding has been used as a tool against humanity by fear mongering and repeating incorrect information to deceive the population of consumers that just want to try to fit into the world and not stand out from the crowd in any taboo way. And the reason the USA had so many more covid deaths is a result of a corrupt FDA and profiteering scheme now rooted into the Government. Sickness is very profitable and scarry, both useful in the control of populations.

Quanto manchi Simonetta

😻

Just goes to show you, educated and stupid is possible because of belief in junk science.

The pandemic of fear not virus. Jung would have seen through this im sure

This is now 2023 and many of us realize that this whole Covid thing caused people to erroneously fall into a state known as Stockholm syndrome, or a total disassociation from reality, resulting in loss of critical thinking skills. Let's not let this happen again. We cannot let fear turn us into obedient sheep.

I've known for a very, very long time that psychiatrists have been low fruit on the hierarchical pole of medicine. I honestly thought that the competition between specialists resulted in minimal recognition for psychiatry and psychoanalysis! I was wrong. Psychiatry leads to psychoanalysis leads to freedom. Which kind of freedom: individual 🤔 or societal impact? Psychoanalysis could change the world 🌎 truth be told.

Just found this! I'll return soon to hear this interview! I'm thrilled. ❤

Based on my personal analytical work, the only way to find the truth in this tangled skein, would be to take a very close look at Jung's childhood years, and at the early years of all his lovers, including all his female helpers. They all adore Jung, have him on a very high pedestal (god like) and will say anything to anyone to preserve his glorified image. Is Jung their covert/unconscious lover/parent? I do not make disparaging remarks toward these wonderful women who built their lives and reputation around Jung. The reality is that we all have a personal unconscious that probably fewer than 100s (?) of Westerners have been able to permeate! Since I'm brainstorming the last 30 minutes, here is what I'm 🤔 thinking; Jung knew Freud's theories on sex. He did not break from Freud because of sex. Freud could not accept Jung's theory of the Collective Unconscious. How did Jung arrive at his belief in the Collective Unconscious? Well, woman seemed to find Jung desirable 😮 both soulful and sexually. Do you see where I'm going? As busy and brilliant as Jung was, how could he Not extrapolate that Freud was on target! Did Jung get the hypothesis of the Collective Unconscious from seeing so many women in his circle all "in love" with 👋 him? Certainly Jung would not inform Freud how he, himself, verified the real possibility of the Collective Unconscious! Men are competitive, Freud would become the Powerful ONE, being Jung's student. This is my Hypothesis. Call me crazy 🤪 if you like! Perhaps some of you understand that I believe that neither the work of Jung nor Freud can stand alone. As I mentally think of the most impactful realizations of my psychoanalysis, both Jung and Freud carry equal weight to my self understanding and cure.

I read the transcript which is also unclear. However, it provides evidence of thoughts that I have pondered myself. It would be a pleasure to communicate with someone knowledgeable of Otto Gross' writings. I have been unaware of the political threat that psychoanalysis could allow in an unhappy society! I have never considered myself a scholar, just an explorer. Thank you for opening my eyes; this transcript is intriguing.

This man, James Hollis age near 80, is a treasure of fabulously interesting and useful information and great enjoyable discussion.. feels to me like talking with.. listening to a kind and caring uncle.. xo.. There’s a deeper source there.. what does the psyche have to say? Gradual shift of authority from our environment to something deep inside.. something that always knows what’s right.. trick is listening.. the world of ‘inherent world of value and wonder..’ .. what if you have a conflict w what you’re ‘supposed’ to do.. something is calling you.. listening will change your life.. often midlife.. is your psyche supporting what you’re doing.. who am I apart from my achievements thus far.. re-tool one’s life… be able to sit w one’s self.. in a world of a thousand distractions.. rather then opening to the aspirations of one’s Soul.. if what I’m doing is right for me… the body will agree… w you.. not suffering. Suffering gets your attention. The change.. “the expression of the suffering of the Soul.. “ just the beginning.. of your real history.. Interesting.. six years time.. of dreaming in your life. “Without death life would be meaningless”.. life is temporary.. more realistic view of life.. ‘I’m here to live my life’ .. Realizing that you have an autonomous psyche within is sooo significant… what does the Soul want.. trust your psyche.. for healing and growth.. it works for you… and will deepen and broaden your life… xo

jung was. not a psychologist

Reading this book some 20 odd years ago answered a lot of what I was going through! This is chance to thank Hollis for his book ! Hollis I hope our lives cross sometime so I can share where my beautiful life is now !

6:22 This question, a good one, is fully answered in the Pamphlet entitled Psychotherapy, Practice and Purpose. It's author is the most famous person to ever live. It's from A Course In Miracles. This is the most profound psychology ever written -- LITERALLY. I think most people have terrible fear of TRUE healing -- which is another word for God. The fear of life is what grips him, not fear of death. There are reasons. They are explicated in it. You'll be glad you did. Alas I can only offer.

_it's so funny hearing about people going through all the motions in life, reaching a certain age, sometimes even to the point of death, and finally asking, Who am I? lol!_ _there was never a time when I didn't know who I was. At least once I was 12 and had my first Revelation, or Encounter, or Mystical Union with the One._ _I have the exact opposite problem. I know who I am. I breath it every breathe. I'm poor. I have nothing. There nothing to do. I am the happiest man alive. I have no friends, no hopes, no dreams._ _the host says to his friend, yeah you should totally go to Zurich, get the training, it will change your life. That's exactly the problem. The fact that you could just go anywhere, or do anything, at anytime you want, and still you will not find happiness! THERE IS NO WORLD. While you delude yourself into thinking there is -- this "great world" of time and change and life and death -- you miss ...the whole point. It's nothing._ _there is something so infinitely bigger than what you're paying attention to, that I assure you, all of your problems come from the fact that you are looking at things that aren't really there. Pray the Vision comes which can change all this. And pray fulloft. There is nothing else to do, because there IS nothing else to do. That's the only purpose of time. To go beyond it. To return to the eternal._ Have a nice day. J

Thank you

This is great. Finally hearing her in English:)

Obviously internalized the Bush era complex and became politically traumatized.

It’s brilliant and insightful. Thanks!

Ursula is brilliant!

The vocabulary of every author and every reader establishes their ability to understand and explain. This interviewee's ability to explain himself is hindered by the complexity and conflicts of his own understanding. The ability to explain a subject in simple terms is essential if you are to ensure that everyone acquires an understanding that matches your explanation. Every individual's understanding and ability to understand is determined exclusively by the limits of their personal vocabulary.

So inspiring. Thank you.

Thank you.

I learned so much! Thanks!

So much wisdom, thank you, deep respect to the interviewer and to Mr. Hollis, very helpful.

Antisemites

I am guessing you have asked Giegerich to be a guest and that he declined?

Warm greetings Stefano, your series of War as Reset is so valuable to turn to in this time of shallow and manipulative reporting. This conversation, for me, presents an especially thoughtful and rich analysis. Thanking you!

Interessante conversazione, ma mi domando perché non dire che in Italia la sanità pubblica non sarebbe stata in grado di sostenere tutte le persone gravemente ammalate di Covid? Perché non denunciare i continui tagli da parte di tutti i governi? Se non ci fossero stati i lockdown e tutte le altre misure, ci sarebbero stati molti più morti. La ragazza bielorussa è abituata ad un certa idea dei diritti civili, ecco perché non è riuscita a comprendere le misure adottate in Europa per proteggere le persone più fragili! Per quanto riguarda la mancanza di pensiero mi viene da sorridere, "pensando" alla incoerenza di chi lo sostiene, ma poi cancella i commenti al video... Allora mi verrebbe da dire che sì, continuate a fare gli eroi reazionari nelle piccole cellule della terapia psicoanalitica che pochi privilegiati possono permettersi, ma poi sarebbe congruente non lamentarsi di quello che c'è fuori da quella stanzina... Ora può anche cancellare il mio commento! Un caro saluto

Gratitude for this thoughtful conversation. There is something remarkable to me in here at the very end of the conversation. Dr. Stein defines Love as that which connects. Of course through connection whether material or spiritual, biological or inert, sympathy and therefore empathy is possible... which is the "stuff" that Love is made of. My paraphrasing, but I do believe that Love as connection is astonishing. Connection also creates possibility. I am induced to turn towards the reality principle of Karma. The essence of interdependence being the connection between cause and effect, Buddhism puts it in the center of its system of understanding. Even now, when I think or use the word Karma, I still have a negative priori. It seems to carry a negative bias, sort of like a cautionary tale that is meant to undergird the super-ego. But now, thanks to Murray Stein sharing his idea of Love being the connection, or that which connects, I see Karma as Love. Therefore this "difficult" word Love as he cautioned in the beginning, brings a needed equanimity to the a priori negative bias of the word Karma. Karma could be interchanged with Love. There still are layers though. Karma is still active when connection is seemingly not. For it is always there. So, perhaps Love as the connection, or Karma, requires an acknowledgement, a participation, consciousness. Understanding? Willingness? Acceptance? Perception?

Thank you! Loved it

This is pretty spot on stuff. I liked the compass metaphor. It certainly looks like I'm ignoring completely what my compass/internal personal authority is trying to communicate to me. My major concern now is that I take up the challenge that present's itself (again I may add) and not to ignore it (like I have done) work through the not the unhappiness but more the lack of purpose and direction I feel at this moment in my life. I'm 62 yrs old, so definitely a long neglected (mid?)-life crisis.