h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A604009

This entry is a companion piece to 'A600643 - CG Jung: His Life and Work' (posted 22.08.01). It tries to do what it says on the tin (sorry those outside the UK who have not seen the ad). I suppose it is a glossary of sorts, which covers the most important Jungian terms, concepts and theories related to the workings of the human psyche, and which are cross-referenced in the main work (but is also a stand alone piece). Again, since there is presently nothing in the guide on Jung's psychology, this entry should be a useful addition.
Thanks for your feedback.

Perhaps you would like to say something about how Jung's work is viewed by modern psychology. Is it fully accepted or has it been superceded? Is it considered that he was working along the right lines, or is it considered an amusing oddity, like the Philosopher's Stone or Ptolemy's Epicycles?

It looks good to me. I even learned something from it.
Recommended.

Modern psychology (clinical, experimental, etc.) do not generally accept Jung's ideas on the grounds that his work is (a) too inaccessible (b) too mystical and unscientific (i.e. too inner-directed for life in the modern world, too little on the problems of relationship and social adjustment), with his ideas not fully equipping his followers to treat the problems of modern men and women. Add to this that Jungian analysis is considered elitist and suitable for only the leisured, cultivated and the rich (and being without universal application)- and the list of his detractors begins to mount up.
However, Jung did attempt to apply empirical methods in his psychology. He also valued the human individual above statistics, and his open-minded attitude that allowed him to give serious attention (often in the face of ridicule) to the irrational, acausal elements of life that science disregards - the parapsychology, spiritualism, precognition, dreams, astrology, alchemy, life after death, synchronicity, UFOs, etc. also makes his work appealing to those dissatisfied with purely pragmatic scientific approaches to natural phenomena. Jung said "science comes to a stop at the frontiers of logic, but nature does not - she thrives on ground as yet untrodden by theory."
In short, some of Jung's ideas and theories may seem, in retrospect, rather crude and outmoded, but he was pioneering and did lay the foundation for subsequent "more enlightened" discoveries of the mind.
I have already alluded to Jung's unique contributions in my companion entry (Jung: His Life and Work), but recognise that a more thorough evaluation of his ideas, and its relevance (or not) in modern society, would be a welcome addition.
Zaphod

Can you manage to put what you just said into the entry itself?

As a kind of postscript, I guess I could.

Editorial Note: This conversation has been moved from 'Peer Review' to 'Jung's Model of the Psyche'.

This thread has been moved out of the Peer Review Forum because your entry has now been recommended for the Edited Guide.

You can find out what will happen to your entry here: http://www.h2g2.com/SubEditors-Process

Congratulations!

Just thought I would add my personal note, by saying well done on an excellent entry.

Ad

"Modern psychology (clinical, experimental, behavioural, etc.) do not generally accept Jung's ideas mainly on the grounds that his work is (a) too inaccessible, and, (b) too introspective, mystical and unscientific"

well actually alot of modern psychology rejects Jungian theory (and Freudian, basically all psychodynamic theories) on philosophical grounds. Repression is a key element in all such theories and repression is a rather weak and ill-defined concept. It seems that our unconscious is equipped with a censor whos job it is to make judgements about what should be let into consciousness and what should be repressed. This task can obviously not be carried out without the censor himself having some from of consciousness, otherwise he could not make judgements about consciousness phenomena such as anxiety or fear or whatever. This is a very strange idea with allsorts of problems. Consciousness within unconsciousness does not seem to work, the censor causes homonculus problems, why can the censor take it but not consciousness?

so the idea of reppresion is never fully explained and carries alot of philosophical problems.........

anybody wanna argue against me?

please.......