Marie Louise Von Franz - The Different Between Fake And True Jungian Psychology
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ก.พ. 2020
- ML Von Franz makes a really honest and beautiful point about the difference between quoting Jung and knowing Jung, about knowing something conceptually versus knowing through real life, blood-and-sweat experience.
Marie Louise von Franz .... what an incredible wise soul. She has helped me understand Jung almost more than any other soul I've run across. God rest her soul.
100% agree, a genius in her own right.
She is not afraid to show her very aggressive side when upset!
Good for her. It is not everyday we see a woman talking so assertively.
I've always found her more accessible than Jung, himself.
Jung contained multitudes, his followers (even the most brilliant of them) presented facets of his thinking. She was humble enough to admit this even of herself.
The language she uses is a lot easier to digest. A lot of Jung’s writing is really intense. It took me about eight months to wholly get through Aion.
She has terrifying and blunt wisdom
She speaks more directly seems to make a greater effort to be clear and understandable. I always got the feeling Jung cared less for the readers experience, that he wrote in a way that made sense to him. Many of his writing lacks a certain level of orderliness, it was rambly at times from an outsiders perceptive.
One of the reasons why it may have been this way is that this is the way you write when you at the forefront of these discoveries. I think Marie-Louise von Franz had a longer time to digest Jung's ideas than he did due to her being alive during much of his lifetime and for long after.
"Each time you realize something in yourself, in your own way, then it becomes yours. I, for instance, found out that when I read Jung, I can read his books 20 times and I don't keep them in mind, so to speak, by heart. But when I do some creative work, research work, and then read his books, and it ties in with what I am doing in my own work - then it clicks and then it stays forever. Then it's as if I had acquired it.
I've really gotten the point, but only when I have creatively worked out my own approach by getting out of the animus, who would simply quote Jung, and quite apart from the animus quoting Jung - what do I feel, what do I see, what have I experienced in my life, where am I? What can I say not because Jung says it, but because I know it myself too, for my own reasons? And only that is valid, the rest can be just forgotten again."
intersesting. and what do you mean by doing some creative work?
@@otisuyttenhove4226 Arranging my stuffed toys in alphabetical order, torturing small animals - that sort of thing.
@@destructard well thats nice man
@@destructard Well, everybody does those things 🙄 couldn't you try something more original!?
@@otisuyttenhove4226shadow work to reintegrate fragmented parts of the self...
To be contained in Jung but after they find out about one Self, then it becomes their own work, not Jung’s anymore…this is a truly a prophet and a bridge to God, once one across the bridge, one can be thankful and appreciative in great awe to what this man (Jung) has done for humanity which is called Soul Liberation
Thank you for posting this. Marie Louise von Franz gives us a key to understanding things Jung said by working with our dreams and active imagination meditations as Jung did, but finding our own creative way.
It's easy to get caught on just one facet of his work as it stirs something in us.
The only fake Jungians I know are those who've turned individuation into an individualistic endeavor to embellish and empower their ego. Then the work of understanding ourselves and honoring the higher powers is missed.
Jung would sit down to calm himself, maybe do some yoga, to see if there were an image or voice that might be the cause of a certain thought, feeling, words or action, even somatic sensations.
Arny Mindell developed this further. Just as our dreams can reveal the spirit elements of our being, especially the higher Self, so can our body, or Dreambody as he called it.
One could be considered to be a Jungian in realizing what we feel and experience, especially with our dreams as Jung did. But he himself exclaimed, "Thank God I'm Jung and not Jungian."
It really is about becoming oneself by realizing what we feel and experience to avoid being so possessed by a shadow element. Plato saw how we can be so bound without the light of understanding.
This is happening a lot, even among Jungians. Jung had wondered if his spirit would have to come back again.
The Ring of Power needs to be returned to its source.
I love this woman so much. She truly is Jung’s greatest pupil.
very good indeed. thank you for posting.
Nice to hear her. I started reading "The Problme of the Puer Aeternus" yesterday. I'm finding it not only very relevant to me, but also a nice introduction to some of Jung's ideas.
have you read "Man and His Symbols"? It's probably the best intro and all around work on Jung's thought
@@individuationportal I haven't, but I'll check it out. Thanks for the recommendation!
I'm working on the Puer Aeternus text and ordered a hard copy. With Jung I've seriously found religion. This shit is so grounding and restorative.
@@shawnmuench Have you watched any of Jordan Peterson's Biblical series?
@@paxonearth Not much of the Biblical. I was into Peterson just after undergrad when I first forayed into philosophy. He was helpful for that period, but I've learned he's a bit loose in some areas outside of psych (speaks too confidently about Heidegger etc). I don't want to criticize though.
My relationship to Christian materials isn't good. I always have to convert them symbolically because the literal teachings are so trite and stupid. Unfortunately very few Christians get past that kindergarten understanding of salvation and think it's about literal sin or literal hell or whatever. No deity could be that dumb.
Dunno why I'm raving beyond what you asked haha
Take care!
You always hope that uploaders of content that is not theirs originally would include the source
Prestige psychology. I see a lot of that among Jungians today.
She even looks like jung!🤯 great vid
I was feeling that too. Jung and her have a different aura.. wholeness. Like a person who has a very evil shadow that they battled with defeated and now controlled.
She imitates him, probably out of admiration.
@@tafferski i agree, but I actually meant phsycially haha. Her face looks like his even
@@user-fb6yp8xt5t I think there's an overlap between the physical and the mannerisms.
MVF seems to have been an incredible thinker. She really helped me understand many of Jung's concepts in a clear manner. I have more and more realised though that her relationship with Jung seemed to have an almost religious zeal. Not entirely positive. She first met him as a young girl and until her death her entire life was lived in his shadow, physically and mentally. She moved very close to him, built a tower almost just like his, overlooked all of his flaws, rigorously defended EVERYTHING he ever did. Not just his thought but his personal choices etc. She never married or had a real relationship (apart from a suspected female relationship in old age). It's strange that Jung was responsible for this woman becoming a great thinker, but her obsession also thwarted her. All of her work, from Fairy tales to Puer never really grew beyond rephrasing Jung's own. There are times you feel that she wants to go beyond, go deeper, but is almost held back by a fear of saying something which was not already been said exactly by Jung. I feel like if she overcame this complex she may have become more than a great elucidator of Jung's work,. A thinker in her own right. Perhaps she could have developed Jungian though further. Jung himself saw the limitation of his concepts and scope for growth as more was learnt. Only death stopped this development.
That occurred to me too, she is too zealous in her defence of him.
It's odd that she did not attempt self understanding.
I wonder if she viewed Jung as a father figure, or as a colleague; did she ever speak of her parental family? She literally devoted her life to Jung, it seems, and never questioned her personal issues. I only wonder why she did not examine her own life.
All this bullshit is seen kn a surface. All of you have no understanding of her and her own personal views of jung.
This explains everything!!!!!!!! 🔥 Jung was a complex for me exactly as this is spoken
1:30 Hell yeah ☯️
Her facial expression at the very end after "they have taken to prestige psychology" 🤣 I so wish Marie Louise was still with us - she could attend some of the so-called Jungian's talks today and give them a piece of her mind.
Beautiful
I feel this strange allure in the enhancement of her swiss accent, because, in full bloom, it reminds me of Carl Jung's accent in his interviews on youtube.
And in her, or through her, I feel Carl Jung's presence and philosophy embodied, especially knowing that they worked together for 30 years
The last comment is so very accurate!
She's awesome.
Brilliant genius.
Exactly Jung's ideas can only become real substance in your life when you are in the experience of what Jung is describing. You can read Jung 20 x's, and it fades or lacks meanings, Then later in life = post 60 yrs of age, things begin to **click** as I say Jung is in active imagination with me, Jung and I would be good friends, yet we could also made great enemies, as I know more than he about religion. But then I have access to material he did not and experiences he did not. Jung would love me and hate me. I read Jung via critical mind.
I like the excerpts of Von Franz's talks that you upload, but to me, they lack the context necessary to really understand what she is saying, which is often very deep and rich. It's like looking at threads in a great tapestry. Would you consider uploading some of her complete interviews?
The only way to understand Jung is to live him ❤
Right on, Marie.... too many derivative "Jungians" taking credit for his original ideas through a mangled offshoot.
Jung was definitive in all things psyche, Now as for his religious views, some OK many others rejected.
She accurately discribed Jordan Peterson decades ago.
is there the full video of this interview? I'm very interested from the bits I've seen
if anyone finds this please tag me
Almost no one will like my asserting this but:
We must never overlook the fact that even into old age, Jung still wore a conventional necktie.
Plus, the 20th century was packed with great men of history: Einstein, Freud, Heidegger, Sartre, Picasso, Joyce, ...
I have seen this several times that some person who tries to claim a certain position of accomplishment will try to alter or criticize or not mention that what they are talking about are Jungs theories
So many steal without referring to Jung
Hmmmm...........
Does anyone know where this full interview is?
cant find no.1 but here it is th-cam.com/video/ZJIBrJmVGsU/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/d19Fo3-cphk/w-d-xo.html
Jung was a prophet sent by God dealing w all things of the psyche, No one will ever come after Jung to give us the gold he gave us.. Nowas to his religious ideas, there one must be very careful, Jung's was divided and had great great pressure not to destroy christianity. I know Jung very well, I now have active imagination with Jung. He had Philamon as active guru I have Jung and Yeshua.
Why shed have a go at Paul like that 😭
The Jungians have abandoned Jung's core ESSENTIAL SUPER CRITICAL concepts, I have zero interest in anything taged Jungian, Jung said I am glad I am Carl Gustav Jung and NOTTTT a JungIANIST,,, hahah, In B Hannah's bio on JUng, The JungianISTS, good grief charlie brown.
I noticed she speaks English with her teeth not moving much but her lips are. Is that a Swiss thing?
She had Parkinson's