Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

autumnjager t1_j7n8tfr wrote

Reply to comment by sisharil in What writer has read as many books as Jung? by Fragrant_Penalty_

Odd thing to say.

1

sisharil t1_j7n8vxz wrote

Is it that odd to point out how bizarre it is to make a big deal about standard academic convention?

1

autumnjager t1_j7wwquu wrote

Have you read Jung? I've read many academic texts, and nothing compares to the incredible range and obscurity of the ancient texts he references, and in so many langauges. God knows how he found these books or was able to read them all. Even in the age of the internet I often can't find references. You also seem to have a snidey conceited tone toward Jung and his work.

1

sisharil t1_j7wzggh wrote

I consider love of Jung to be something of a red flag for rightwingers that are into the absolute bullshit that is Jordan Peterson-style pseudoscience and theorizing. This is admittedly perhaps unfair of me. But Jung (and Freud), pioneers as they were in their field, are fairly... how to put it... they aren't exactly up to date on modern psychoanalysis, with many of their ideas shown to be unscientific and flawed.

1

autumnjager t1_j7x145o wrote

Yes, it is unfair of you. Also Freud != Jung. I suggest you try the first section of psychology and alchemy. Jung documents the analysis of a subject via dreams. It's about as easy to read as Jung gets.

1

sisharil t1_j7x16az wrote

I don't really care about dream analysis, but thanks.

1