1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Jungs Red Book: Is experience of the territory not map of the territory

Discussion in 'Theological Concepts' started by David T, Jun 20, 2019.

  1. David T

    David T Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,261
    Ratings:
    +2,663
    jung_redbook-1.png

    Jungs private work Liber Novus ("The New Book") or known as red book, was a manuscript he worked on that wasn't relased till 2009.

    The text is interesting both in its style and the nature of its content. It aligns perfectly with what is known as Revelations in the New Testament.

    Revelations actually makes no sense read as a map of the territory. We can read that purely scientia or deductively as a map, and as such come away assuming its total nonsense. As a map it most certainly is. The interesting aspect to revelations is it knows this.

    At the end of revelations there is an easily skipped over thus invisible statement written. It says "do not add a word nor take away a word from what is written.. If we see through the lens of mapping or scientia we will automatically try to interpret (i believe,i dont believe, i am agnostic) the text is a map and that nonsense is a singular. All three agree we start with a map, and the map determines the territory. False. In the old testament thats treated as sin. Never mind what nonsense that orthodoxy says since its deductive by its nature.

    The text is in actuality identical to jungs red book that book is not a map of the territory, but an experience of the territory. Its expressed sapientia not scientia. Where experience is primary, and mapping, or (belief, non belief agnosticism) is nonsense as being primary. If i ask what comes first the music written down or the music experienced, a musician knows how that is. Music is much much much older than writing. But (i believe, i dont believe, i am agnostic) has that reality inverted deductively.

    Mental hospitals are filled with individuals mapping what they are experiencing. (i believe, i dont believe, i am agnostic) while scientia will automatically look at what is believed, what is not believed, what is agnostic first, jung and others are looking noy at the statements but the underlying process itself. Jung was clear and difficult to understand. Mystics swim where the insane drown. That ocean is the territory no mapping of it is it. To believe so is what kant called transcendental illusion.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. pcarl

    pcarl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    3,283
    Ratings:
    +1,325
    Religion:
    Catholic
    Years ago I read 'Structure of Biblical Myths, the Ontogenesis of the Psyche', the author, Heinz Westman, from the preface, 'Jung seems to have known that reading, authentic reading, is the composition of decomposition, and that it will therefore not be easy. In 'Answer to Job he wrote a short preface to his readers. He called the preface 'Lectori Benevolo, "To the Kind Reader", using an epigram form the Bible; "I am distressed for thee, my brother" (II Samuel 1:26).
    Jung seems to express sympathy for the reader. In another preface he wrote "I am afraid my works demand some patience and some thinking. I know its very hard for the readers who expect to be fed by informative headlines...I warn the reader this book will not be an easy pastime. Once in a while he will meet with thoughts which demand effort of concentration and careful reflection-a condition unfortunately rare in modern times. On the other hand the times of today seem to be serious enough to cause at least uneasy dreams if nothing else."
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. David T

    David T Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,261
    Ratings:
    +2,663
    Yes.....Jung is incredibly difficult unless you have the misfortune of experiencing like jung!!! Ha!!

    In contemporary world, in regards to psychosis generally the world of psychology has some deeply dubious experts on psychosis. The insane. In jung we hace someone who went head first into it, comes through it without losing touch and writes. In the late 50's there was a tv interview and the host in his most 1950's highly educated tv voice asked jung "do you believe in god". Jung got all animated scooted to the edge of his chair and emphatically said NO... Now i could leave it right there. His no could be construed as an atheist if i did. He then states empharically "i do not believe in god i know".

    THAT IS WIERDO IN A MODERN WORLD....

    He is wierd and that wierdness is him saying no belief has zero to do with anything at all, i experience and thus i experience, thus i know.

    How we understand that gets pretty screwy louie to say the least. Jung had enough experiences to both understand the mentally ill experiencially directly and how diassociated from realty and why they wrre disassociated at the dame time. Sometimes the simple act to breathe to beaware of breathing is enough to send people to the mental hospital. I hace never met one mental parient who walked aroung going "breathing a deeply underappreciated action, we tend to forget and get lost in our thoughts"

    Jung understood alot, and is incredibly difficult to understand. We dont even understand the simple act to breathe. Thats modern thats scientia run amuck thats normal.

    How crazy am i? I talk about breathing and most folks say "word salad" ha!

    I may very slightly edit this later for clarity but thats mostly commas.
     
    #3 David T, Jun 20, 2019
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2019
  4. pcarl

    pcarl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    3,283
    Ratings:
    +1,325
    Religion:
    Catholic
    There is an interesting blurb on the back cover of Westman's book written by Pope John XXIII-
    "If we could find a way of getting mankind to sit down and read the Bible as a newly published book, 'A Narrative of Man Searching for Himself', It would become very popular in places where people have forgotten it."
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. David T

    David T Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,261
    Ratings:
    +2,663
    It always surprises me when a pope has a bit of a clue!!! Like how did he get there inspite of everything conspiring against that! The territory is deep and mysterious in its ways .....
     
Loading...