9/7/22

This is a thorough discussion of the ego, its relationship to the Self and the archetypes normally associated with religious experience and myth. It focuses heavily on the symbolism of alchemy and is not intended for someone unfamiliar with Jung and the symbolic importance of alchemy to the unconscious. ( )

I have rarely read anything containing as much unsubstantiated conjecture at Ego and Archetype. While some of the insights into individuation (particularly the fallacies) were useful, it would appear that in Edinger's mind, if not in Jung's, correspondence rises to the level of causality. It does not. At one to my absolute astonishment, Edinger, who spends a lot of time drawing on alchemical and gnostic sources, says this is all verifiable science. It is the furthest point. This is a book of metaphysics or theology in support of the notion that there are such deeply ingrained and universal symbols in all of us that this must be God. As he says, he or they are out to provide a new context for what was lost when religion died. Context yes, proof no. It is all just as much a hypothesis as any other religion. Now, in defense, you really want to have read Jung quite a bit before picking this up and I can't claim to have done so. This is perhaps why I was so irritated by many of his pronouncements. Suggest yes, claim, no. While the four elements in the mandala may have parallels with the four elements that also parallel the four states of psychological awareness, that correspond to the four types of stones of the Philosopher's stone - so what? Apparently the benefit to this archeology of symbols is that if you had a patient who dreamed something you could (almost endlessly) consider all the symbolic nuances and therefore guess something about what is going on with the person. But here you are thrown into the symbol end and lacking Freud's reliance on real cases and clinical examples, I found it alchemical and not in a good way. It was more like anthropology than psychology. ( )

I found this book somewhat useful as a point of departure while reading widely on Jung's theory of the collective unconscious. Edinger believes that human beings can achieve completeness only through a conscious merging of the ego and the unconscious, and in the third chapter of the book, "Encounters with the Self," he explores the role of the collective in the formation of identity.

He argues that "modern man" desperately needs to re-establish a connection with the primitive psyche, but this re-establishment of primitiveness must manifest itself in the individual's relationship with the conscious inner world. To be primitive in relation to the outer world is to be "superstitious." I think this is an interesting distinction in some ways, but since this isn't really my area of interest, I might be inclined to suggest skipping straight to the Jung. ( )