[youtube]dBDGw6AFoSs[/youtube]
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
The Collective Unconscious.
|
[youtube]dBDGw6AFoSs[/youtube]
Thoughts?
Like many psychological theories, I think this is un-falsfiable so I am hesitant to label some of Freud and Jung's ideas science and sound more like philosophy.
The collective unconscious sounds A LOT like the Will to Life from Arthur Schopenhauer's ideas. I don't think it's quite "collective" in a spiritually liked way, but more like similar due to us all being human, and our biology all being the same. If our conscious minds are due to experience, and the unconscious shaped more by human nature ( as well as memories being repressed into it ) that seems to be the result of genetics.
Ok. All science was philosophy once, until it was proven to be true.
Science has been proven to be true? Since when?
RE: The Collective Unconscious.
November 1, 2010 at 5:39 am
(This post was last modified: November 1, 2010 at 5:41 am by ib.me.ub.)
Well its close enough for me ;-).
EDIT: Is this better. All Science was Philosophy once. (November 1, 2010 at 5:39 am)ib.me.ub Wrote: Well its close enough for me ;-). Very true, but the one distinction between what is still philosophy and what is science now is that the ideas that were testable and had the possibility for falsification. Here's a short read about it http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/popp...ation.html Anyway, psychology sits on the fuzzy line between the two but that makes it all the more interesting. Here's an interesting link about the collective unconscious I found. http://www.kheper.net/topics/Jung/collec...cious.html (November 1, 2010 at 5:35 am)Tiberius Wrote: Science has been proven to be true? Since when? As a methodology it has been proven our most reliable truth seeking mechanism by a fucking mile, that's the most 'true' it's going to get. I don't even think it makes grammatical sense to say that a methodology is 'true', does it?
.
RE: The Collective Unconscious.
November 2, 2010 at 7:15 am
(This post was last modified: November 3, 2010 at 7:44 am by ib.me.ub.)
(November 1, 2010 at 8:47 am)The Skeptic Wrote: Very true, but the one distinction between what is still philosophy and what is science now is that the ideas that were testable and had the possibility for falsification. Here's a short read about it http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/popp...ation.html Empirical testibility is an issue at the present point in time. I hope that one day it will be proven to be correct, as it will answer alot of questions. |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|