Jung thought so; that energy is emitted from certain personality traits that were often split themselves. The Mother, the Father, the Child for example expressing elements of each, who we are and our alternative selves.
Do you, relatives and friends fit a clear character type? The loquacious one, the reserved one, the grumpy one, the creative one. Look around. Is that all we are?
Jung asserts that the energy engendered through archetypes and the synthesis and modification of archetypes creates society. Is he right?
Hi Stanley,
Greetings.
Yes, as we are mothers & fathers and/or we had them.
As you know, our genes & environments determine how we will end up.
Please see "The Tao of Jung : The Way of Integrity," and "Transforming Depression : Healing the Soul through Creativity," Tarcher, Putnam, and Viking, Penguin & Nicolas-Hays, respectively.
Peace & gratitude,
David H.Rosen, M.D.
In many cases yes, we are archetypes. However, there are times when there are intersperse of behavioral traits. The uniques environments each of us find ourselves determines out add-ons and deductions in our often dictated genetic code.
Not sure that's true, only that in patriarchal societies masculine archetypes are emphasised
Archetypes, or role-based stereotypes are hard to break free from in most societies. Women get the brunt of childcare while men are expected to go out and work.
In America, as a resistance has become norm, women are more in the workforce and men are expected to take on a larger role in the nurturing and care of children.
Archetypes may be played out in particularly out-of-the-way locations or in places where the status-quo is not challenged by educational or economic changes.
I would contend to say that there is more of a resistance to archetypes now than there was in the past because women and men are becoming more equalized in society.
The concern over gender has and continues to be confronted and like racism its core beliefs have been attacked and corroded. Interestingly we still have gods rather than goddesses in abundance.
That is very true. Any "religion" that has a feminine core rather than a masculine one is romanticized, or philosophized away as something "sweet", "comical", or deadly/dangerous.
As long as the depiction of females in power is one of distaste, humor, or danger, women and men will not be seen as intellectually or capability equal.
Archetypes were postulated by Plato, who knew what George Engel,M.D.
later wrote about in his important 1977 Science article..."The need for a new medical model." And, for a view of healing as biopsychosocial, please see "Patient-Centered Medicine : A Human Experience" by myself & Uyen Hoang, M.D. of Auckland, New Zealand (Oxford University Press, 2017)...and there are two chapters by Engel in that text.
The emergence of masculine archetypes can be traced in time and include proprietorship related to possession of objects and property during urbanisation. The extended archetype of muscular masculinity can be seen in the portraits of kings in Mesopotamia by the turn of the 3rd millennium. Before that, Innana still had formidable influence and power.
Thanks David. I know some of this but the addition was welcome. Much appreciated.
Kathryn, Inanna was not just very powerful, but of course controlled or was responsible for love and war-as a fertility goddess. There is some evidence that she was the first deity of Uruk/Udug-the first known city-rather than an who became the high-god of the Sumerian pantheon, resembling in his character Zeus (to an extent) and Allah. Although Inanna was deposed through each millennium as a major force, most Sumerian literature is about her. She also morphed into Ishtar, Astarte, and Aphrodite. Therefore, the female element was both powerful and aggressive, not passive and supine. You did not mess with Inanna.
Stanley's answer is deeply appreciated and he is correct. Of course, we could go also to the Egyptian gods and goddesses to have more models that eventually led to the Greek pantheon. Being caught in the West is one of our blind spots as everything came from the East. I am of course thinking of the rich cultural histories of China and India.
Just a slight movement sideways, but what about how roles determine our personalities and behaviour-if I remember rightly, Sartre country.