Thank you for sharing this interview with Ken. I would like to ask you, regarding AI, how close it currently is to your vision described in your book "boomeritis." thank you. I love them. Pablo, from Argentina.
1:22:15 I have heard Ken Wilber tell this story several times. And it is simply not true as he describes it. For one thing, the event was not the end of the relationship between Jung and Freud, not at all. Freud and Jung met for the first time in Vienna in 1907, where they dove into intense conversations about the human mind. Jung later said they spoke for 13 hours. What followed was an intense correspondence, and it was the start of a professional collaboration and personal friendship that lasted until 1913, when professional disagreements between them led Jung to resign from his position as chairman of the International Psychoanalytical Association - an organization that they had founded together. They met in 1913 for the last time. The conversation Wilber refers to took place in 1910 (see Jung’s memoirs). It is a false assertion that they never spoke to each other again after that. That is simply wrong. How Wilber can claim that so definitively (‚They literally never spoke to each other again after that conversation, not till the day they died and they never ever said a single word including till the day they died.‘) almost leaves me stunned. As I said, the final break did not occur until 1913. He also quotes the conversation itself inaccurately: Wilber claims that Jung wrote about it in his memoirs that 'Freud did not realize that what he (Freud) called occultism was everything I was interested in in my life'. When in fact Jung wrote: 'What Freud seemed to mean by "occultism" was virtually everything that philosophy and religion, including the rising-contemporary science of parapsychology, had learned about the psyche.’ Wilber should either keep quiet about the conversation in question or get a correct picture of it based on the numerous literature available. It would also do him no harm to read Jung's memoirs (again), especially his chapter on Freud. And then, Mr. Wilber, you may recount the event truthfully.
Thank you for sharing this interview with Ken. I would like to ask you, regarding AI, how close it currently is to your vision described in your book "boomeritis." thank you. I love them. Pablo, from Argentina.
Thank you so very much for hosting Ken Wilber. Next? Chris Langan to review his Theoretical Cognitive Model of the Universe (TCMU).
Langan is a crook. And btw, Wilber's last book is just a mess.
1:22:15 I have heard Ken Wilber tell this story several times. And it is simply not true as he describes it. For one thing, the event was not the end of the relationship between Jung and Freud, not at all. Freud and Jung met for the first time in Vienna in 1907, where they dove into intense conversations about the human mind. Jung later said they spoke for 13 hours. What followed was an intense correspondence, and it was the start of a professional collaboration and personal friendship that lasted until 1913, when professional disagreements between them led Jung to resign from his position as chairman of the International Psychoanalytical Association - an organization that they had founded together. They met in 1913 for the last time.
The conversation Wilber refers to took place in 1910 (see Jung’s memoirs). It is a false assertion that they never spoke to each other again after that. That is simply wrong. How Wilber can claim that so definitively (‚They literally never spoke to each other again after that conversation, not till the day they died and they never ever said a single word including till the day they died.‘) almost leaves me stunned. As I said, the final break did not occur until 1913.
He also quotes the conversation itself inaccurately: Wilber claims that Jung wrote about it in his memoirs that 'Freud did not realize that what he (Freud) called occultism was everything I was interested in in my life'. When in fact Jung wrote: 'What Freud seemed to mean by "occultism" was virtually everything that philosophy and religion, including the rising-contemporary science of parapsychology, had learned about the psyche.’
Wilber should either keep quiet about the conversation in question or get a correct picture of it based on the numerous literature available. It would also do him no harm to read Jung's memoirs (again), especially his chapter on Freud. And then, Mr. Wilber, you may recount the event truthfully.