What Book Are You Reading at the Moment?

[DrYouth]

Do you identify with the NeoFreudians or Alder etc.?

Intensive short term psychodynamic therapy is very interesting. I like Jon Frederickson on this.
Adler had some interesting things to say... but I haven't gone deep on his work.

Are you a trained CBT?

Yes... but for the most part I consider it weak sauce... on it's own the response rates are not good enough.
From a foundational point of view it relies entirely on the left hemisphere and this does not have the power to engage with the origins of psychopathology.

What are your views on the efficacy of bioenergetics/Lowens approach?

The modality I have trained in extensively for the past 5 years is Somatic Experiencing which likely as some of it's origins in Reich's work. It's core approach is based on somatic mindfulness and engaging the autonomic nervous system so as to allow the resetting and regulation of the nervous system when it has been impacted by trauma or arrested developmentally.

[GloryofGreece]

Understanding alchemy through the lens of Jung is pretty mind-blowing.

It would seem alchemists had the same idea as Jung long before. Dragon is the shadow. You have to save the princess and create an alchemical union (unconscious and conscious integration) to create the gold (individuation). You could describe his entire school of psychology in terms of alchemy. In a way, he basically just made alchemy modern.

I definitely respond well to the metaphor of it all. Its interesting that alchemists were into proto chemistry and ethics/religion. Hell the fact that Newton was super into it should raise an eyebrow and vouch for its worthiness.

[Speaker to Animals]

Understanding alchemy through the lens of Jung is pretty mind-blowing.

It would seem alchemists had the same idea as Jung long before. Dragon is the shadow. You have to save the princess and create an alchemical union (unconscious and conscious integration) to create the gold (individuation). You could describe his entire school of psychology in terms of alchemy. In a way, he basically just made alchemy modern.

I definitely respond well to the metaphor of it all. Its interesting that alchemists were into proto chemistry and ethics/religion. Hell the fact that Newton was super into it should raise an eyebrow and vouch for its worthiness.

The hypothesis here is that the true core of alchemy wasn't actually about turning physical lead into gold at all. All that chemical stuff was an allegory to speak about a process of individuation (I guess illumination in the medieval context) without running afoul of the spiritual authorities.

A lot of that stuff carried over into folklore and especially fairy tales as well.


The dragon is your shadow. You have to defeat him to save the maiden. She is your unconscious, I guess. The alchemical union of the hero and the princess produces a new person who is the integrated whole combining the unconscious and the conscious into a new identity. There is the king (father figure) and queen (mother figure). I can't remember how those relate to Jungian psychology (it's been many years since I read this stuff now).

Realize that, to Jung, the unconscious is feminine. When you encounter that female figure in dreams that is nobody you actually know but somehow she means something to you, I think that is often your unconscious just trying to interact with you. That's your princess. She is held captive by the dragon, which is all the evil shit you pushed out of your conscious mind. But you have to grapple with those things to defeat the dragon.

I can't remember everything, though. You have to read the book if you are interested. It's a tome, though. Be warned.



This looks like a much shorter version:
https://www.amazon.com/Alchemy-Introduc ... 091912304X


The one I read was somewhere north of 500-600 pages.

edit:

Never mind, more like 450 pages.

https://www.amazon.com/Psychology-Alche ... 0691018316

[Speaker to Animals]

My take:

The term dark enlightenment was hijacked by realists somewhere in recent centuries to mean realist philosophies like Machiavellianism combined with ideas of men like Nietzsche. While I guess the term works in the context of an alternative to the Enlightenment in the historical perspective, there is another way of looking at the term..

Maybe we could replace the word enlightenment with illumination to get a better idea of what I mean. If you read mystical works of saints, for instance, you will get a window into illumination with God. It's that light you see painted above very wise people in history. We all think of it as their minds literally filling with light, but I don't think that's exactly right. Here I am talking about works of mystics like saints Augustin as well as more recent mystics such as St. Therese (The Interior Castle). St. Hildegard's Scivias is incredible for this as well.

Now consider what a dark illumination would mean. Not necessarily satanic in nature, but more materialistic and psychological. A dark illumination is the kind of thing analytical psychologists would try to help people attain. I guess conceptually the ultimate goal would be total integration between all the parts of the psyche. I don't even know if that is possible, but it's interesting.

It's also dangerous in the spiritual perspective because people apparently tend to make that dark illumination some ultimate goal when union with God should be the goal. Few of us are meant to be mystics, but we are all meant for union with existence itself in eternity (Beatific Vision).

I think there is something to this alchemical practice (and I suppose analytical psychology since that is it's modern lineage) because people have been chasing this thing throughout history and in several different separate civilizations.

[GloryofGreece]

I would have never guessed you were into this stuff or even aware of it. Only inclination would have been the podcast you posted on "consciousness" a while back. I'm pleasantly surprised , never assume things about people, right?

Do you think people can be "soulful" and not religious?

What do you think would be indicators /attributes of a mystic/shaman type person?

[Speaker to Animals]

God interacts with people everywhere.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nezahualcoyotl_(tlatoani)

Even in that kind of society.

Nezahualcoyotl described a mystical experience with the creator. He rejected the Mesoamerican gods and outlawed human sacrifice within his city because he was certain the creator found it repugnant. He built empty temples to this creator and wrote poetry about him. His primary religious duty to the creator was fasting. He was kind of like King David but in Mesoamerica a few generations before conquest.

He wrote a poem about how God creates the world as if he paints with flowers. It was very famous amongst all of the Mesoamericans, even after conquest. His poetry was known by all the Nahuatl speakers even after Spanish occupation.

If you read the accounts of what happened when St. Juan Diego was approached by the Blessed Mother, you will find an interesting detail that relates to Nezahualcoyotl. The Blessed Mother instructed St. Juan Diego to fill his garment with flowers from a particular field and take them to the bishop. When St. Juan Diego was brought to the bishop, the bishop didn't believe him. St. Juan Diego repeated the story and then unfurled the garment with flowers. As the flowers fell out of the garment, they painted the portrait of the Blessed Mother on the garment.

All the Mesoamericans had to have noted the connection. Here the Spanish bishops and priests were talking about a God not unlike the one described by Nezahualcoyotl. Then this miracle happened with the flowers.


Here is one of his poems about the creator and flowers:

With flowers You paint,
O Giver of Life!
With songs You give color,
with songs You shade
those who will live on the earth.
Later You will destroy eagles and tigers:
we live only in Your painting
here, on the earth.

With black ink You will blot out
all that was friendship,
brotherhood, nobility.

You give shading
to those who will live on the earth.
We live only in Your book of paintings,
here on the earth

Read this one in the context of what St. John of the Cross wrote:

I begin to sing, I elevate to the heights the song for He By Whom All Live. Yayahue ohuaya ohuaya.

The festive song has arrived: it comes to reach up to the Highest Arbiter. Oh lords, borrow precious flowers! Ahuayya ohuaya ohuaya.

Already they are being renewed: how will I do it? With your branches I adorn myself, I will fly: I am unfortunate, for that reason I cry. Ohuaya ohuaya.

A brief moment at Your side, Oh, You By Whom All Live. Truly You draw the destiny the man. Can You hold him who feels himself without good fortune in the earth? Ohuaya ohuaya.

With variegated flowers adorned Your drum is erected, Oh, You By Whom All Live. With flowers, with freshness - Ayahue! - You give pleasure to the princes. Huiya ohuaya! A brief instant in this form is the house of the flowers of song. Ohuaya ohuaya.

The beautiful yellow corn flowers open their corolas. Huiya! The warbling quetzal of He By Whom All Live makes a jingling clamor. Yeehuaya! Flowers of gold open their corolas. Aya! A brief moment in this form is the house of the flowers of the song. Ohuaya ohuaya.

With colors of the golden bird, with red-black and lucent red You decorate Your songs. With quetzal feathers You ennoble Your friends, Eagle and Jaguars, You make them valiant. Ohuaya ohuaya.

Who has the piety to reach above to where it ennobles one, to where it brings glory? Yehuaya! Your friends Eagles and Jaguars, You make them valiant. Ohuaya ohuaya.

This is what St. John of the Cross described about his experience with God:

On a dark night,
Kindled in love with yearnings
--oh, happy chance!--
I went forth without being observed,
My house being now at rest.

In darkness and secure,
By the secret ladder, disguised
--oh, happy chance!--
In darkness and in concealment,
My house being now at rest.

In the happy night,
In secret, when none saw me,
Nor I beheld aught,
Without light or guide,
save that which burned in my heart.

This light guided me
More surely than the light of noonday
To the place where he
(well I knew who!) was awaiting me
-- A place where none appeared.

Oh, night that guided me,
Oh, night more lovely than the dawn,
Oh, night that joined
Beloved with lover,
Lover transformed in the Beloved!

Upon my flowery breast,
Kept wholly for himself alone,
There he stayed sleeping,
and I caressed him,
And the fanning of the cedars made a breeze.

The breeze blew from the turret
As I parted his locks;
With his gentle hand
He wounded my neck
And caused all my senses to be suspended.

I remained, lost in oblivion;
My face I reclined on the Beloved.
All ceased and I abandoned myself,
Leaving my cares
forgotten among the lilies.

[Speaker to Animals]

Anyway, it seems to me that what the alchemists described and what the mystics described were two very different phenomena. The way I look at it is illumination versus dark illumination. Not that the latter is bad, but that it's inherently materialistic and not so much oriented towards a noble teleological goal.

It mirrors the enlightenment and dark enlightenment ideas. The latter are very practical and get your temporal and materialistic goals met, but without the former you don't have any principles or ethics. You are just a more sophisticated animal manipulating and coercing your way through life to achieve temporal ends that will avail you little in eternity. But subjugating the dark enlightenment ideas to the service of enlightenment ideals is somewhat noble. Perhaps there exists a similar relationship with illumination.

[GloryofGreece]

Yea it does seem like the alchemists and depth psychologists (most) are trying to systematize and "study" the more mystical/spiritual things in the world. Whereas someone called to a mystical life wouldn't be as intellectual or "scientific" about their beliefs and practices. Fundamentally its about union with God as you said, not about self actualization or "individuation". Though I think one could possibly do both.

[Speaker to Animals]

What I am arguing is that these are two entirely different goals. Spiritual enlightenment, for want of a better term outside of Catholic philosophy, is not the same thing as psychological individuation or what the alchemists were after.

I think it a big mistake to assume they are after the same thing in different ways.

[Hastur]

Finnished 12 rules for life so now I'm digging into this: