- This event has passed.
Carl Jung – Analytical Psychology: the Self, the Shadow and Archetypes
1 October 2025 @ 10:00 am – 12:30 pm
STRAND:WHO DO WE THINK WE ARE? The Self in Philosophy
TALK: Carl Jung – Analytical Psychology: the Self, the Shadow and Archetypes
SPEAKERS: Richard and Alexis
Talk – Slides:
20251001 – Carl Jung – Analytical Philosophy
20251001 – Carl Jung – Analytical Philosophy
Comment from Patrick Dixon on 2nd October
Many thanks to Alexis and Richard for a highly stimulating talk yesterday.
I learned a lot, about myself and others, and it took me way outside my comfort zone (which was great). And it certainly stimulated me to spend time on the internet yesterday learning more.
In one sense, I accept that my question regarding the evidential underpinning that has emerged over the last century for the various components of Jung’s “model of the psyche” was naive – it is clear that the applicability of such models will be contingent on the makeup of each person; and the myriad complexity of each member of humanity means such models can be guides at best. The correlations in the evidence that studying psychoanalytical results will inevtiably be less strong than when one studies, for example, chemical or physical processes.
But that does not mean those correlations are less interesting or valid. I am facinated by the calibrated experience of those who live and work with those models and the people who need them. Does psychotherapy deliver powerful results to a wide range of people in need despite the limitations of the models? Or have they proved too rough in practice to really provide a consistent way of treating people with similar symptoms and conditions?
And have Jung’s ideas spurred the development of newer and better models that do help? (Would CBT be an example?)
I’d love to hear more about that.
Thanks again Alexis, Richard for an excellent talk.
Patrick
Reply from Alexis Pfeiffer 2nd October 2025
The follow text is a brief report i have taken from CoPilot AI. I am not aware of jungian therapy results on any of my usual counselling sites so at least feel this gives a reasonable indication of how it is currently judged regarding its efficacy.
Jungian therapy has seen a quiet but meaningful resurgence in recent years, especially among those seeking deep, long-term psychological transformation rather than symptom-focused relief.
Successes:
• Significant Improvements: Empirical studies conducted mainly in Germany and Switzerland show that Jungian therapy leads to substantial improvements in symptoms, interpersonal relationships, and personality structure. These gains often persist for up to six years after therapy ends A.
• Post-Therapy Growth: Many patients continue to improve even after completing therapy, suggesting that the insights gained foster ongoing personal.
Further reply from Alexis Pfeiffer 2nd October
Reduced Healthcare Use: Health insurance data reveal that patients who undergo Jungian therapy tend to visit doctors and hospitals less frequently afterward—sometimes even less than the general.
Depth-Oriented Healing
• Focus on Root Causes: Unlike symptom-based approaches, Jungian therapy emphasizes individuation—achieving wholeness by integrating the conscious and unconscious mind. This includes working with dreams, archetypes, and the shadow.
• Long-Term Commitment: Therapy often spans years, allowing for profound exploration of the psyche. While this may not suit everyone, those who commit often report life-changing results.
Limitations and Challeges
• Lack of Randomised Controlled Trials: Despite promising results, Jungian therapy still lacks large-scale randomised studies, which limits its acceptance in evidence-based clinical settings.
• Mixed Popularity: While it retains a devoted following, Jungian therapy is less mainstream than CBT or psychodynamic therapies. Which are shorter quick fix methods and also thereby less expensive.
If you’re drawn to Jungian ideas—like shadow work, archetypes, or dream analysis—this modality offers a rich, transformative path. It’s especially powerful for those seeking meaning, integration, and personal growth beyond symptom relief. Would you like to explore how Jungian therapy compares to other modalities like CBT or Internal Family Systems?
Comment from Peter Keeble 2nd October 2025
I too much enjoyed the session on Jung. As a poet I think much effective imagery probably emanates from archetypes, whether from the collective unconscious or a more local cultural milieu.
I was fascinated by the naturalistic account of the collective unconscious as deriving from the species and being transmitted genetically (and perhaps more locally, environmentally). It seems difficult to see how these physical biological structures also transmit from generation to generation for example the qualia of terror at the sight of a snake. There is a perfectly reasonable case that such qualia are not needed at all for survival and that an unconscious biological machinery that reacts unthinkingly to danger signs in its environment would survive just as well. But I think the mystery (to me and perhaps many others) of how instinctual behaviour and qualia reactions apparently get transmitted through physical structures has led to the misapprehension of the collective unconscious as being posited as some sort of shared mental pool of symbols that we all dip into, mentally.
Synchronicity was mentioned near the end. I’ve found it hard to fathom this out. Acausal comings together of inner feelings and outward events. It sounds highly unconvincing to me. Jung apparently did not simply mean that when we’ve had a minor car accident we tend to see all the dents on other people’s cars as we walk past them. Rather it is some sort of deep feature of the universe, not working through causation, signaling to you, perhaps to make you feel better. Frankly that sounds like the very definition of psychosis.
Going back to the broad sweep of Jung’s account of the psyche as it was presented I did wonder if there was a bit of reification going on – namely taking kinds of mental behaviour and ascribing it to a thing in the structure of the mind. I guess it doesn’t much matter but I thought in some cases we might be talking about a unified mind that simply reacts in different ways to different stimuli. But as I write that it seems hard to justify such different behaviours without some sort of structures (whether mental or biological) to make them happen.
And finally, I loved the analogy for individuation that Alexis gave of the bulb planted upside down – very evocative of Schopenhauer and Nietzsce!
Reply from Patrick Dixon 2nd October
Building on Peter’s point about “reification” (if that is what it was) I too felt that Jung was ascribing names to mental processes and then implying that those things are actually things rather than processes.
For example “The Shadow” – is this really a thing, or just a collection of memories of life events that the programming of the brain has “suppressed”. The Ego is another – is this a place in our brain, or a piece of brain software that marshals our memories that are not repressed?